10

P Application No. Sl98l00969IMIN Date registered 14th July 1999 APPLICANT LAW MINING LTD, CADZOW HOUSE, CADZOW INDUSTRIAL ESTATE. HAMILTON Agent DEVELOPMENT EXTRACTION OF COAL BY OPENCAST METHODS LOCATION BADALLAN FARMS, BETWEEN SHOTSAND FAULDHOUSE

Ward No. 17 Grid Reference 292000659000

File Reference

Site History No significant history

Development Plan 1. Adopted Shotts Local Plan - Rural Area 2. Southern Area Local Plan (Finalised Draft) - Preferred Area for Opencast Coal Extraction 3. Strathclyde Structure Plan - Preferred Area for Opencast Coal Estraction

Contrary to Development Plan No

CONSULTATIONS

Objection Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland No Objection Historic Scotland Scottish Rights of Way Society East of Scotland Water Shell UK Scottish Office Agriculture, Environment & Fisheries Department West of Scotland Water Scottish Power Health and Safety Executive Institute of Environmental Assessment (see test) The Coal Authority Conditions West of Scotland Archaeology Service SEPA East Transco Scottish Natural Heritage RSPB Central Scotland Countqside Trust NLC Leisure Services The Scottish Sports Council Scottish Wildlife Trust NLC Environmental Services (see text) West Lothian Council No Reply None FOR OPENCAST COAL EXTRACTION (FMALISED DRAFT SOUTHERN AREA LOCAL PLAY)

NORTH !$-LANARKSHIRE Rnnqmcsdaria by Dem-nmr Deenmmf PLANNING AP P LICAT1 ON NO: S/98/00969/M I N amcmcrmm COUNCIL P)e--Mm?smeI - MOTHERWELL ML! 1RS R- hm DI. oe- surq MIilnp .nn PROPOSED OPENCAST COAL SITE AT tl. ~IMM~of- esu*r dRW YwWl Td*100n.O1895YIZ3DO FUO'lsll302101 ii ---,on- ou-- 140wO Y.wramdnwwnmDol*~oPra~ OSUcnnUCBOllL BADALLAN FARMS, NR FAULDHOUSE -.q!n3lporuM--r-e

13

REPRESENTATIONS

Neighbours Newspaper Advertisement 19 individual letters 723 ‘pro-forma’ letters individually signed Petition with 756 signatures Letters from 4 local action groups Letters from 2 Community Councils

COMMENTS LAW Mining wish to extract coal by opencast methods on a 137ha site known as Badallan Farm, bebveen Fauldhouse and Shoffs on th A7 1. The site straddles the boundaries of North Lanarkshire and W Lothian.

In total, this nrould involve the removal of 7j0,OOO tomes of coal c 3 ‘/z year period, with an additional year to allow for the restoration of the site. Approximately !4 of the entire site is within the boundai West Lothian Council and it is currently considering a planning appIication for its onn area.

The application has been the subject of a significant nslmber of objections, mainly from the Fauldhouse area. However, it has alsc put under considerable scrutiny by this Department. It is my conc that on weighing up the benefits and disbenefits of the proposal, a light of current poliqv advice and guidance, that the proposal is acceptable and that planning permission should be granted.

Should the Council be of a mind to grant planning permission, the application must be referred to the Secretan; of State, who will decide if the matter should be ‘called in’ for consideration by him. Thereafter. if he allows the Council to determine the application itself, planning permission would not be issued until applicant has delivered an appropriate Bond of Caution to guara: restoration of the site, and entered into a Section 75 Agreement c the control of various environmental maners both during and aft1 coding period.

It should be noted that the implementation of the proposed sche within North Lanarkshire. as it currently stands. is dependant or West Lothian p3n being granted planning permission, and \soul require the submission of revised plans for it to be operated independently.

The Committee should note that some of the objectors have ask the opportunit). of addressing the Committee before it makes its decision.

I recommend. that planning permission is granted subject to thf and conditions noted beIo\v. Further details on all aspects of tl proposal can be found nithin the attached report. 14

.. P

RECOMMENDATION

Grant, subject to the conditions contained within the attached appendix.

NOTES TO COMMITTEE

(1) The applicant has agreed to enter into an agreement in terms of Section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 in respect of the submission and implementation of an aftercare and management scheme, the fbture protection of flan-agricultural items of restoration, the implementation of noise and dust monitoring scheme and the submission and implementation of a ferruginous material containment scheme. The appellant has also agreed to provide a Bond of Caution for a sum of money to be agreed in advance in respect of restoration and aftercare. The planning consent should notbe issued until these matters have been concluded.

(2) If granted, this application will require to be referred to the Secretary of State for Scotland in accordance with the Ton7n and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) (No 2) Direction 1998. 15

List of Background Papers

Planning application S/98/00969/MIN and accompanying plans, Environmental Statement and background reports - Letters from applicant dated 4/12/98, 22/12/98,25/1/99 and 11/2/99 - Letters from West Lothian Council dated 27/10/98, 18 + 23/12/98, 20/1/99 and 17, 23 + 26/2/99 - Letter from McRoberts Solicitors dated 18/12/99 - Letters from North Lanarkshire Council dated 17/11/98, 11/1/99 - Lettter from RPS Cairns dated 18/1/98 - Letter from Fairhurst dated 24/12/98 - Reports from ‘Stanger Science and Environment, dated 4/11/98, 1111 1/98, 26/1/99, 3/2/99, 8/2/99 and 15/2/99.

Letters of Consultation

- Scottish Office Development Department dated 13/8/98 - Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland dated 18/8/98 - Historic Scotland dated 18/8/98 - Scottish Rights of Way Society dated 2 1/8/98 - East of Scotland Water dated 26/8/98 - West of Scotland Archaeology Service dated 26/8/98 - Shell UK dated 27/8/98 - Scottish Ofice Agriculture, Environment + Fisheries dated 26/8/98 - West of Scotland Water dated 25/8/98 - SEPA East dated - 19/8/98, 15/9/98, 12/1/99 and 21/1/99 - Scottish Power dated 28/8/98 + 14/1/99 - Transco dated 3/9/98 - HSE dated 17/9/98 - SNH dated 2/10/98 + 411 1/98 - Institute of Environmental Assessment dated 19/10/98 * Policv Guidance and Advice - NPPGl - The Planning System (1994) - NPPG4 - Land for Mineral Working (1 994) - NPPG4 (Annex A)- Draft - Opencast Coal and Related Matters (1998) - NPPG 15 - Rural Development - PAN50 and Accompanying Annex A. B + C- Controlling the Environmental Effects of Surface Mineral Workings ( 1996-1998) - Opencast Coal - Review of Planning Policy in Scotland (1997) - Strathclyde Structure Plan (1995) - Shotts Local Plan (1982) - Consultative Draft Mothewell District Local Plan (1 995) - Finalised Draft Southern Area Local Plan (1998) 16

Letters of Reoresentation from:

- David Goss + Assoc on behalf of Muldron Estate dated 2 1/7/98 - N. Findlay, 5 Bellona Terrace, Fauldhouse dated 7/8/98 - ‘FATAL’ dated 25/8/98 - hlr & Mrs Findlay, 12 Earls Place. Fauldhouse dated 22/9/98 - A Leitch, 59 Park View, Fauldhouse dated 26/8/98 - D Sharp, 6 Eastfield Road, Fauldhouse dated 26/8/98 - D Frew, 28 Sheephousehill, Fauldhouse dated 26/8/98 - ‘F.A.C.E.’ dated 2 1/9/98 and 25/9/98 - G. Tweedlie, 70 Quarry Road, Fauldhouse dated 29/9/98 3 - R. Watson, 78 Church Place, Fauldhouse dated 30/9/98 - Mr & Mrs Salmon. 8 1 Croftfoot Drive, Fauldhouse dated 24/9/98 - C Tweedlie, 70 Quarry Road, Fauldhouse dated 29/9/98 - Teresa Hatch, 8 7 Sheephousehill. Fauldhouse dated 29/9/98 - Joseph Hatch, 87 Sheephousehill, Fauldhouse dated 29/9/98 - A Hatch, 87 Sheephousehill, Fauldhouse dated 29/9/98 - Mr & Mrs McGrath, 5 Shotts Road. Fauldhouse dated 2/10/98 - ‘SPACE’ dated 30/9/98 and 18/10/98 - Mr & Mrs T Laird. 94 Lanrigg Avenue, Fauldhouse dated 24/9/98 - Muireston Community Council dated 1/9/98 - ‘LACE’ dated 1/9/98 - Mr & Mrs Currie dated 2/10/98 - Mrs Williams, 4 Eastwood Park. Fauldhouse dated 4110198 - P Hawkins, 10 Woodhall Terrace, Edinburgh dated 23/9/98 - Fauldhouse Community Council dated 15/9/98 - S Frame, 7A WiIIonbrae, Fauldhouse dated 5/10/98 - Letter of petition organised by ‘FACE’ with 750 signatures - 723 pro-forma letters with individud signatures Note: Anyone jvho wishes to examine the names and addresses of these letters should contact the Planning and Development Department at 303 Brandon Street. Motherwell

Any person nishing to inspect the above background papers should telephone Mothemell 302 102 and ask for Mr Kellock.

. 17

.. P APPLICATION NO. S/98/00969/MIN

REPORT

1. INTRODUCTION

8 1.1 This application relates to a proposed opencast coal mine at a site known as ‘Badallan’ between Shotts and Fauldhouse. The site straddles the boundaries of North Lanarkshire and West Lothian, and planning applications have been submitted to both authorities, each accompanied by a full Environmental Statement. This application has been the subject of a great deal of scrutiny, the conclusions of which are outlined below.

? 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The entire site, extends to 137ha , approximately % of which lies within North Lanarkshire. The entire site is comprised mostly of agricultural grazing land. It lies between the A71, the B7010 (Shotts-Fauldhouse Road) and the B715 (Headless Cross Road).

2.2 The landform of the site is best described as undulating, and contains the valleys of 3 watercourses, these being the Breich Water, Lingore Linn and an un-named bum. There are several pockets and terraces of mature trees. Crossing the site in a SW-NE direction is a sizeable embankment of a disused railnay.

2.3 The site contains 2 farmhouses (West and East Badallan Farms), with ancillary farmbuildings and one bungalow.

2.4 The site eshibits signs of previous deep mining activity, including several small spoil heaps and the remains of some pit head buildings.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDINGS

3.1 For the most part, the site is surrounded by agricultural grazing, although there are significant areas of bogland around the westem end of the site most notable of which is the ‘Springhill Bog’ to the north-west of the site. Immediately to the east (adjoining the A7 1) is a large area of coniferous woodland, to the north of which lies Greenburn Golf Course and Fauldhouse Cemeten,.

3.2 To the south and west of the site lie the 3 working farms of Knoweton, Headlesscross and Muldron, these being approximately 900m, 200m and 400m respectively from the excavation area. To the north lies Leadloch Farm (approx 700m from the working area) and a total of 8 dwellinghouses along Shotts Road leading into Fauldhouse (these being 400-600m from the working area). Fauldhouse lies approsimately 650m from the North Lanarkshire boundary, behind the embankment of the Glasgon~-Shotts-Edinburghrailway line.

3.3 The eastern edge of Shotts lies a minimum of 1.6km from the site. A minimum of Ikm to the south-west and also adjoining the A7 1. is the Damside Opencast Coal Site which has permission to produce coal until October 2000. Two km to the east, also adjoining the A7 1 is Levenseat Quarq and Ikm to the south is the Muldron landfill site. 18

..

4. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

4.1 LAW Mining is a Lanarkshire based company and is part of LAW Holdings Ltd. The company currently produces around 600,000 tonnes of coayyear from several opencast coal sites, mainly in the Lanarkshire/East Ayrshire coal fields.

a 4.2 As noted above, the proposal is to extract coal by opencast methods. The entire site is likely to yield 750,000 tonnes of coal, 570,000 tonnes of which would be taken from within North Lanarkshire.

4.3 Two of the first 3 cuts are almost entirely within West Lothian, with the remainder including the access, yard area, overburden mound, site offices and 7 remining cuts being in North Lanarkshire.

4.4 Initial works would consist of the creation of the yard area and the vehicular access and the formation of protective mounds. Thereafter, the total coaling period would extend to 3 !4 years with an additional one year being allocated for restoration. The coaling period solely within North Lanarkshire would be 2years 11 months. Blasting would be required over approximately 15% of the site to remove rock cover at various points throughout the whole site.

4.5 Access would be taken from the A7 1 at a new junction which includes a section of road widening. Coal would be taken from the site by lorry, with an average of 6-8 lorv movements per hour (i.e. 3-4 lomes in and 3-4 out). Traffic would be destined for 2 main locations. An average of 2 lorries per hour would go to the Mossend rail terminal (for Cockenzie Power Station) via Allanton. Nenmains and Nenhouse. Another 2 lorries per hour would travel eashvards to Longannet Power Station via Whitburn. the M8 and the Kincardine Bridge. Some other traffic would go directly to England via the M8.

4.6 The site would be operated 7.00 am. to 7.00 p.m. Monday to Friday with maintenance being camed out 7.00 am to 1 .OO pm Saturda\.s. The site would not operate at any other time or on national bank holidays.

4.7 The entire site is expected to offer emp1o)ment for 35 people, although this would for the most part provide continuity of emploJment for the applicant’s existing staff.

4.8 The overburden mound would be created at the eastem end of the site (between the yard and the Breich Water). This would reach its maximum size at cut 2 and would measure a maximum of 15m in height. The mound would be contoured and partly grass seeded. This would remain in place until the end of coaling. Sub and top soils would be stored in mounds around the site, and these would van. in height from 5 to 8 metres.

4.9 The proposals would necessitate the temporan. re-routing of the Lingore Linn and un-named bums. and the removal of a line of mature trees between the two farmhouses. Settlement ponds. sited nest to the \md area. nould discharge into the Breich Water.

4.10 The application was accompanied b!. an indicative restoration plan. the key elements of which are summarised below:

afteruse of agricultural grazing 19

re-creation of diverted watercourses which would be contained within protected riparian zones, incorporating two ponds

0 replacement tree planting

0 removal of railway embankment

creation of marshy grassland

4.1 1 Within West Lothian, the proposed restoration scheme would also include:

0 land given over to golf course to allow for extension

0 large area of marshy grassland

0 pond adjoining the Breich Water

4.12 Other than the golf course, the non-agricultural elements would be created and managed by suitably qualified esperts.

5. POLICY CONTEXT

5.1 National Planning Policv Guideline 4: Land for Mineral Working

NPPG4 sets out the Governments stance on mineral workings, which recognises the importance of these resources whilst acknowledging that their extraction must be reconciled with care for the environment. It identifies the need for the planning system to facilitate development while protecting sensitive communities and uses and encouraging the highest level of operating levels and restoration. In October 1998, a draft Annex to NPPG 4 was produced, which specifically addressed matters relating to opencast coal estraction. This followed on from the Government’s “10 Point Plan”, on opencast coal working. This annex offers advice on how such proposals should be assessed, and in particular addresses the potential impacts on communities close to workings.

The general advice contained in NPPG 4 is followed through into NPPG 15 ‘Rural Development’, in which the Government offers guidance on the protection, control and enhancement of rural areas.

5.2 PAN 50 Controlling The Environmental Effects of Surface Mineral Workings

This advice note sets out best practice and standards for the controlling of most environmental effects found at mineral workings. Supplementary advice is given in the three annex which concentrate on noise, dust and site traffic. 20

5.3 River Almond Integrated Catchment Management Plan

In June 1998, the kver Almond Partnership (of which North Lanarkshire is a member) launched the above plan. The application site is within the plan boundary. It is the aim of the plan to promote sustainable development in the catchment area through the planning system, and seeks the restoration of the River Almond and its tributory waters (which have hithertoo suffered from very poor water quality) to the highest quality possible.

5.4 1995 Adopted Strathclvde Structure Plan

The Structure Plan identifies ‘Preferred Areas for Opencast Coal Extraction’. Whilst the plan showing these areas is indicative, it is clear that the application site is within such an area. Recommendation 4 1 asks that coal operators and local authorities give priority within the preferred areas to opencast coal estraction.

Proposals should have regard to the criteria set out in policy MrN 6, namely:-

(a) the environmental impact of both the extraction process and the movement of coal for processing and distribution.

(b) the potential to transport coal by rail.

(c) the opportunities for the restoration of despoiled land.

(d) the effects on nearby communities.

Policy MIN 1A sets out a number of criteria against which proposals such as this should be assessed, namely-

(a) whether the proposal is within a ‘preferred area’ (b) the availability of alternative supplies within the existing landbank (c) the environment implications (d) the effects on nearby communities (e) infrastm ctu re imp1ications (f) opportunities to conserve associated minerals, restore dereliction or review associated consents.

5.5 1982 Shotts Local Plan

The adopted local plan for the area dates back to 1982. Policy ‘RURZ’ relates to opencast coal extraction in the area, and states that:-

“There will be a strong presumption against mineral extraction on B and B-i- qualiv agricultural land or amenity woodland areas. but no general presumption against mineral estraction on B -, C and D quality land subject to the folloning guidelines:

(a) No permissions for mineral extraction will normally be granted for sites within M mile of the urban area around Shotts. Allanton, Hamvood, Bonkle (East) and Bonhousebog or nithin % mile radius or Hamvood and Hamvoodhill hospitals. 21

.. (b) Developers will be required to lodge a restoration bond with the Council and will be invited to enter a Section 50 Planning Agreement to guarantee the proper working, phasing and restoration of the whole area to which the mineral application refers.”

5.6 1998 Draft Finalised Southern Area Local Plan

Chapter 7 of this plan outlines the Council’s draft policies on mineral extraction.

Policy MIN2 seeks to divert proposals for opencast coal extraction to preferred areas. The application site is contained almost entirely within part of the ‘Leadloch/Badallan’ preferred area.

Policy MIN 3 presents a list of criteria against which proposals should be judged, namely:-

(a) whether the proposal is within a preferred area (b) the environmental implications of the proposal, including the impact on landscape quality, visual amenity, nature conservation and watercourses. (c) the impact on the residential amenity of nearby communities. (d) whether the proposal allows for the long term improvement to the appearance and finction of the site and maximises community benefit. (e) the nature of the proposed working methods, including timescales, measures for screening and aftercare, and (f) the effect on highway safet\., traffic movements and the scope to utilise rail freight.

Within the supporting test to this policy, there are guidelines as to how the policy should be interpreted, and relevant sections are noted below-

Proposals in prominent locations should be capable of being integrated as far as possible into the surrounding landscape.

The loss of features which make a positive contribution should be compensated by restoration to a similar or improved state.

0 It is the responsibility of the applicant to prove that mineral extraction will not cause any significant nuisance to nearby communities. To assist in achieving this: excavation areas should generally be hrther than 300 m from adjoining built up areas.

Traffic generated by mineral operations should be focused on major routes.

Policy MIN 7 states that all planning permissions for mineral extraction should be accompanied by a Guarantee Bond ensuring the eventual restoration and aftercare of the site. If this particular planning application was approved. consent would only be issued once the applicant had delivered a bond of a suitable amount. This would be assessed using the formula within the policy.

There are other policies relevant to the proposal Lvhich are not specifically related to mineral extraction. 22

._ The 3 bogs around the site (see para 3.1 above), including Springhill Bog, are all identified as SINCs i.e. Sites of Interest for Nature Conservation. Policy ENV 8 seeks to protect SINCs and will not permit development proposals which would adversely affect them.

The site is also covered by Policy ENV 8, Countn*sideAround Tonns. This states that the Council will seek to promote and protect the Countryside and will not normally permit development other than that which relates to agriculture, forestry, outdoor leisure uses or other appropriate rural uses.

Members will already be aware that the draft Finalised Local Plan has undergone a consultation process, and the Committee was advised of all representations at its meeting of 24th Februar). 1999. Of these, many related to mineral extraction and 6 letters contained objections to the inclusion of LeadlochE3adallan as a preferred area for mineral extraction. Such an objection was submitted by West Lothian Council.

6. CONSULTATIONS

The planning application was subjected to an extensive consultation process. Below is a summary of responses made to the proposal as originally submitted. Unless otherwise indicated, more details on how the responses influenced changes to the planning application can be found in section 8 of this report (Planning Assessment).

6.1 NLC Environmental Services

Both Councils used the services of ‘Stanger Science and Environment’ to make an independent assessment of the likely impacts of the proposal in terms of noise, dust’air quality and blasting. Stanger’s conclusions were reviewed by the Director of Environmental Services, who assisted in their interpretation. The main conclusions of the assessments are summarised below:-

Dust ImDact

PAN 50 Annex B (The Control of Dust at Surface Mineral Workings) states that developers should undertake a dust assessment study for all new mineral workings, and that these can be qualitative or quantitative. Many of the objectors expressed concerns over the possible link between opencast dust and health problems. and it was felt that the Environmental Statement. which incorporated a qualitative assessment. did not adequately assess and address the implications for dust deposition and air quality Accordingly. Stanger were asked to cam out a quantitative study. this being a ‘dust modelling exercise‘. This involved taking existing background readings of dust around the site. and making an assessment of what additional levels of dust the opencast operations would create. There are two main potential areas of concern. these being dust as a nuisance and dust and its impact on health (i.e. the respiratoq. systems). These are outlined belon:

(a) Dust Nuisance:

PAN 50 suggests that in the control of dust nuisance, levels in the range of 200-350 mg/m2/day are acceptable upper limits. Existing dust deposition levels around the site are currentl:. in the order of 35mg/m2/da:.. If the site cme into operation. dust would rise to levels in the order of 6 1melm’lda\.. 23

I (b) Air Oualitv (Health Implications)

While there are no set standards for air quality at the present time, the National Air Quality Standards have limits which will come into force in 2004/5. These standards will seek to limit dust levels of respirable sizes (commonly kno\cn as ‘PM 10’) in the atmosphere to a figure of 5Omg m-3, although this figure is currently under review. Again, existing background levels are measured and an estimation is made of fhture levels when the site is operating. An existing average concentration of 48 mg m-3 was found around the site. Stanger calculate that during year one (the worst case scenario where most of the workings are within West Lothian ) the working site would contribute an additional 15% of ‘PM 10’s to the atmosphere.

However, Stanger is not in a position to advise on the implications (if any) which the above alterations to air quality may have on the health of people living in the proximity of the site. This matter is addressed in full later in this report (para 8.2 - 8.10).

2. Noise

When judged against the recommendations contained within PAN 50, noise limits are likely to be exceeded at 3 locations, these being East and West Badallan Farms and Muldron Farm. Both Badallan Farms are owned by the current land owners of the site. All properties are working farms.

Other than the above locations, the proposal is unlikely to result in the recommended noise limits being breached.

6.2 Scottish Natural Heritage

SNH had no objections in principle to the proposal as originally submitted subject to several matters being addressed, the main ones being:-

(a) Full details required which confirm that the proposal will have no adverse impact on the hydrology of Springhill Bog.

(b) Revised restoration proposals should be submitted which aim to offer greater protection to the local landscape, particularly around the Breich Water.

(c) The applicant undertakes mitigating measures designed to protect local otters, birds and badgers.

(d) All non-agricultural elements of the restoration scheme should be the basis of a 10 year aftercare and management scheme, and protected in perpetuity by a Section 75 legal agreement.

These matters have been addressed, and further details are contained within the Planning Assessment section of this report. 24

6.3 Scottish Environment Protection Aeencv (East):

SEPA East had no objections in principle to the proposal as originally submitted, but have asked that the following matters be addressed andor noted:-

Water Oualitv

Consent to discharge into the Breich Water has been sought and approved.

On the basis of plans originally submitted, there is a risk that water may be lost from the Breich Water into the site.

Particular care is required in preparing and managing site drainage, including the diversion and eventual reinstatement of the bums.

Air Oualitx

Several processes eg crushing, screening of coal etc will require authorisation from SEPA. Amongst other things, this authorisation seeks to minimise dust generation at source.

Fermeinous Discharge

In order to mitigate against possible pollution risks after the site has been restored (eg ferruginous discharge similar to that encountered in the Allanton area), SEPA recommends that an action plan be put in place. This would require the operator to identi% and isolate any iron rich material before it is placed back into the void.

Sprinehill Boq

Details originally submitted with the application do not appear to prove conclusively that the proposal would have no adverse impact on the nearby Springhill Bog.

Following krther discussions betxeen SEPA, the applicant and both Councils, hrther information was submitted on matters relating to management of site water, ferruginous discharge and Springhill Bog. This additional information was able to clarify outstanding matters to SEPA’s satisfaction. Further examination of these matters can be found within para 8.45-8.5 1.

West Lothian Council

As a neighbouring authority, West Lothian Council has made the following comments on North Lanarkshire’s part of the site:-

1. Until West Lothian Council has completed its assessment of the proposed opencast within North Lanarkshire Council’s area and, in particular, following the conclusion of the assessment of noise. blasting, dust and air quality by the environniental consultant engaged by this Council. West Lothian Council is concerned that the proposals ma!. have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity and environmental qualit). of the community of Fauldhouse. West Lothian Council n-ould therefore request that North Lanarkshire Council 25

a does not determine the application until the assessment has been satisfactorily completed.

2. North Lanarkshire Council should take full account of the guidance contained in the draft revised NP.P.G. on opencast coal published by the Scottish Office in October 1998 in so far as it relates to the merits of the proposed application.

3. North Lanarkshire Council should take hll account of the content of West Lothian Council’s previous objection to the policies relating to opencast coal extraction in the Finalised Southern Area Local Plan when it applies the relevant policies to the current application.

4. North Lanarkshire Council should not assume West Lothian Council’s part of the opencast site nil1 be approved. Their assessment of their part of the site, therefore, should assume that it stands alone. Any approval by North Lanarkshire Council should also assume their site stands alone and amended plans should be sought and conditions witten accordingly.

0 6.5 NLC Leisure Services

The Conservation and Greening Manager made the following comments:

0 The qualit). of information n.hich accompanies the application is generally good.

The overall aims of the restoration plan are welcomed, particularly the creation of riparian zones.

The maximum possible retention of mature trees near West Badallan is recommended.

6.6 The Scottish Sports Council

The Scottish Sports Council has made the following comments:-

0 The proposal raises some concerns in relation to potential impact on Greenburn golf course i.e. noise and dust. These impacts should be properly controlled.

The proposed estension to the golf course, as part of the restoration scheme, is noted. The Sports Council sugests that the applicant should assist the golf course in more ways than simply providing land i.e. in the creation of new landforms etc.

6.7 Scottish Wildlife Tnist

The SWT has made suggestion as to how the restoration proposals could be enhanced, namely wider shelter belts and the creation of ponds. 26

6.8 Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland

The APRS has objected to the proposed development on the following grounds:-

(a) It is likely to have an adverse impact on the quality of life of local residents.

(b) It \.Vi11 degrade an area of landscape.

(c) The cumulative impact of past, present and future mines has not been considered fully.

(d) The potential effects on ground and surface water may be severe and need more careful examination.

If approved? the APRS would wish to see the site pulled away from the Breich Water and wishes assurances that the Springhill Bog is properly protected.

6.9 The Coal Authoritv

While it does not comment on the merits of the proposal, the Coal Authority has confirmed that the site lies to the south of ‘Leadloch’, a prospective opencast site for which a licence was granted in 1994. Such a licence is conditioned on other consents being granted, including planning permission.

6.10 Roval Societv for the Protection of Birds

The RSPB has no objections in principle to the proposed development, but has made the following comments:-

There is no bird population present on site of national/international importance

Measures should be taken to ensure that the nearby Springhill Bog is protected.

0 It is accepted that bird and mammal interest on site nil1 not be damaged long term subject to appropriate conditions, in particular the location of weedy and rough edges to the site during operations.

RSPB has already co-operated with the applicant on restoration schemes at 2 other sites and would wish to see a similar input in this site. In particular, they would wish to see the creation of ponds on site with marshy net grassland.

6.1 I Central Scotland Countnside Tnist

The CSCT does not object in principle to the proposed development, but would wish to make the folloning points:-

0 Planting should be carried out alongside the A71 as soon as possible to assist in the screening of works and to ensure that the restored site benefits from as mature planting as possible. 27

..

The CSCT would prefer to see a greater element of woodland creation within the restoration scheme.

6.12 Institute of Environmental Assessment

The IEA does not comment on the merits of the proposal, but rather makes a qualitative assessment of the Environmental Statement. Using a marking system, ranging from excellent to very poor, the IEA assesses the quality of the ES document. This is a useful tool in the decision making process. In this instance, the ES was judged for the most part to be between excellent and very good (the top two grades). Only 2 sections were marked below these levels, these being the assessment of impact significance (which rated a ‘satisfactory’) and examination of alternatives which was considered unsatisfactory.

6.13 Historic Scotland

The site contains no sites or features of archaeological/historical interest which are protected at a national level.

6.14 Scottish Rights of Wav Societv

There are no knonn rights of way within the site.

6.15 East of Scotland Water and West of Scotland Water

Both authorities have no objections in principle to the proposal.

6.16 West of Scotland Archaeologv Service

The West of Scotland Archaeology Service commented as fol1on.s:-

The archaeological study, which forms part of the Environmental Statement, has been competently carried out.

It is accepted that the 19 knonn areas of interest (including 5 in West Lothian), are of local interest and not national.

It is noted that remains. where possible, will be retained, and othemise will be recorded before removal. Subject to appropriate planning conditions, the West of Scotland Archaeology Semice is satisfied with the proposed measures put forward by the applicant.

6.17 Shell UK

Part of the site is within the consultation area for the high pressure ethylene pipeline which lies to the west of the site. Shell UK has been in direct correspondence with the applicant. particularly on details of blasting. and has no objections to the proposal. 28

6.18 Scottish Office Arriculture. Environment and Fisheries DeDartment

Under the terms of the Secretay of State’s responsibilities for water supply, water protection, sewerage, flood prevention. coastal protection and waste disposal, SOAEF have no comments on the proposal, other than to note the Environmental Statement omits to mention that the Breich Water is a tributary of the River Almond which is designated as a ‘Sensitive Area’ under Section 5 of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive.

6.19 Scottish Power

An 11,000 volt overhead line will have to be diverted as part of the proposed workings, and the applicant has made suitable arrangements in this connection.,

6.20 Transco

The site is nithin the consultation zone of a high pressure gas main which lies to the west of the site. Transco has no objections to the proposal subject to restrictions relating to blasting.

6.2 1 Health and Safetv Executive

In terms of the potential impacts of the proposal on nearby major hazards (i.e. the gas and ethylene pipelines), HSE has no objections to the proposal.

7. REPRESENTATIONS

7.1 The proposed development has been the subject of an extensive publicity exercise which is summarised as follows:

North Lanarkshire and West Lothian Councils placed joint adverts in 4 local newspapers and a national journal advising the public and any other interested parties, that the applications had been submitted and that these were accompanied by an Environmental Statement.

Copies of the application and Environmental Statement were put on deposit in five locations for interested parties to inspect i.e. the offices of both Planning Departments, Shotts Library, Allanton Senior Citizens Centre and Fauldhouse Library. These locations were made known 0 through the press adverts.

7.2 In addition, the applicant was required to carry out the normal neighbour notification procedure.

7.3 Since the site falls within two Council areas, I agreed with West Lothian to fonvard copies of all objections received by this authority to it for consideration, and it has reciprocated.

7.4 As a result of the above, both authorities are non’ in receipt of the following:

0 19 letters of objection from individuals. all of whom are from Fauldhouse.

723 letters of objection prepared in a pro-forma basis, almost all of whom are from Fauldhouse.

a petition objecting to the proposal with 756 signatures, the majori? of which are from the

c 29

I West Lothian area. with 2 names from Harthill and around 7 names from Fife.

letters of objection from several anti-opencast action groups, these being; ‘FACE’ (Fauldhouse Against Coal Extraction). ‘LACE; (Livingston Action Group for the Environment), ‘SPACE’ (Scottish People Against Coal Extraction) and ‘FATAL’ . (Fauldhouse Against Tipping at Levenseat). 0 letter of objection from Murieston Community Council, Livingston

letter from Fauldhouse Community Council confirming that it did not object to the proposal.

7.5 The following is a summary of the points raised through all the letters of objection:-

(a) Policy

There is a presumption against the development in terms of local plan and Government policy.

0 The proposal is not needed since there is an over-production of coal in Scotland and the market for the coal has not been defined.

The proposal would not comply with the relevant planning policies contained in the Bathgate Area Local Plan, Lothian Structure Plan, draft Mothemell District Local Plan, finalised Southern Area Local Plan, Strathclyde Structure Plan. NPPG4 and Planning Advice Note 50.

0 The proposal would lead to a landfill site being formed.

The proposal would be contrary to West Lothian’s policies on biodiversity and the West Lothian Biodiversity Action Plan.

The application would be contra? to the provisions of the Government’s Ten Point Plan for opencast coal extraction.

(b) Impact on Local Communities

0 The proposal would be morally wrong due to the detrimental impact on the local community, the health and safety of the residents and their quality of life.

The proposal would provide little or no local emplo>ment opportunities or input into the local economy.

Existing residents would nant to leave the area and people would be deterred from investing in the area if the opencast site proceeded.

Blasting on the site could result in possible damage to property and flying debris could affect nearby properties. 30

a 0 The proposal would provide no benefit for the local community (as demanded in the Ten Point Plan).

The development would result in a drop in house values in proximity to the site.

(c) h‘ealth .

No assessment ..as been made on the effect of stress on local residents due to impact of the opencast activity.

The dust generated by the site would affect peqle’s health e.g. respiratory problems, which is already poor in the area. The site would be too close to residential properties and would conflict with Government research on this issue.

0 The application does not provide any proof that no harm would be caused to the health of the community. Recent research show that opencasting could have a detrimental effect on public health.

0 Diesel emissions from plant and vehicles would have a detrimental effect on health.

0 The Environmental Assessment ignores the impact on the public within the affected communities.

Environment

0 The proposal would destroy the landscape of the area which is only now gradually regenerating from previous industrial and mineral activity.

0 The proposal would result in a loss of amenity to the local area due to noise, dust and disturbance.

0 The opencast would create a negative image of the area including the view by passengers on the Edinburgh to Glasgow Central railway line.

0 It would have a detrimental effect on the wildlife and habitats within and around the site e.g. the Breich Water. 31

._ P (e) Associated Hazards

0 Minewater could leak from the site and pollute the environment.

0 There could be subsidence on land around the site (including public roads) from the excavation works and the dewatering of old mineworkings under nearby land.

0 The proposal could result in the release of harmful gases from the site when being worked.

0 The workings could encounter leachate from surrounding landfill sites, including the Eastfield Quarry toxic waste site.

(f) Highwav Safefx

0 The traffic would create road safety and noise problems on nearby roads which already have poor accident records.

7.6 Finally, it should be noted that the applicants, through their lawyers, have made a claim that many of the letters of objection and signatures received in respect of the planning application have been falsified. and that both Councils have a duty to establish the estent of this problem. Whilst I have no knowledge of falsified objections being submitted directly to this Council, I am advised by West Lothian that in two instances, people have received letters from West Lothian in acknowledgement of letters of objection. which the recipients have claimed not to have sent. However, West Lothian were onl?. made aware of these cases by telephone calls which have not been followed up in writing by the people involved. From the evidence available, I do not accept that there is evidence of a systematic falsification of representations.

8. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

8.1 Taking into account all of the information referred to in the preceding paragraphs, I shall conclude by esamining the individual topics listed below.

Health

8.2 The alleged implications of dust from opencast coal sites on the health of those living and working around them is a ven. contentious issue and, one which is mentioned as a concern by many of the objectors. It is essential, therefore, that this issue is addressed in full by this report.

8.3 Government advice and guidance on this particular matter is limited. In PANSO, it is stated that,:

“The Committee on Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP) has concluded that no convincing evidence exists to support the suggestion that air pollution from opencast mining ma?. have a detrimental effect upon the health of those living nearby”. and also.

“Based on current advice: it seems unlikely that dust of respirable sizes could present off-site in concentrations to affect health, (but that) in some cases, larger non-respirable particles could irritate the e?*es,nose and throat of those exposed”. 32

..

8.4 In response to concerns. the Government has commissioned research into the possible health effects of opencast coal mining. but this is still on-going. In the meantime, Draft hexA of NPPG 4 states that planning authorities should adopt the precautionan; principle and ensure that developmeyts do not result in unacceptable levels of airbourne dust.

8.5 Whilst the extent of a health risk (if any) cannot be quantified without the findings of further research, the report produced by ‘Stanger’ on air quality suggests that the proposals will result in a relatively small decrease in air qualiq. and estimates that the total anticipated levels of ‘PM 10s’ will vary from slightly below to slightly above the proposed guideline figure of 50 mgm-3. This guideline figure is, in any case, not yet in force and is also under review, with the possibility that it may be revised upwards.

8.6 It could be argued that if the Government was of the opinion that opencast coal mines had the potential to pose a significant impact on health. then it would have already adopted the precautionary principle in imposing a moritorium on all (or at least some) new opencast operations until the outcome of further research is made known, and translated into Government policy. I believe that it should not be left to individual Planning Authorities to come to a conclusion on such an important issue each time it considers an application for opencast mining.

8.7 On the basis of the above comments, I would suggest that any potential increased risk would not be sufficiently great to justifi refusing planning permission.

8.8 It should be noted that West Lothian Council is currently seeking further guidance on this matter from Lothian Health Board. For my onn part. I am satisfied that the results of the consultant’s report and the conclusions of Government guidance allow me to come to a satisfactory conclusion on the health issue.

Dust Nuisance

8.9 In terms of the dust impact of the proposal as a ‘nuisance’, the Council’s onn investigations conclude that whilst it may result in the doubling of dust levels at some locations around the site. it would still be below recommended levels by a factor of 6. It is highly unlikely, therefore. that the proposal (if worked in accordance with the proposed scheme), would result in levels of dust where complaints would be received.

8.10 To ensure that dust does not become a nuisance. the operator will be required to prepare a dust action plan, outlining all appropriate mitigation measures. and wha$ action will be taken if dust levels become unacceptabl). high. The applicant intends to monitor dust levels. including the use of a sophisticated ’real time’ monitoring system nhich would alert the operator immediately Ivhen dust levels exceed a predetermined level.

Noise

8.11 The conclusions of the Council‘s on’n noise studies concur by and large nith those of the applicant. Recommended noise limits are only like&.to be exceeded at 3 properties. All are working farms. \\here background noise levels can be quite high and 2 of these are occupied b). the current landowners of most of the application site. Using the worst case scenario, the noise levels at these properties nil1 onl!. be exceeded by around 2-3 dba. nhich is not considered to be 33

.. significant. Other than these properties. recommended noise levels are not likely to be exceeded. On the basis of the above. I do not believe that the issue of noise should count against the proposed development.

8.12 To ensure that stated noise levels are adhered to, the applicant will undertake to carry out a noise monitoring programme, the results of which will be made available to the Council.

8.13 The conclusion of the Environmental Statement is that the proposed blasting, which will only be camed out over certain parts of the site, will be within recommended levels, will not cause damage to property or unduly harm the standard of amenity enjoyed by local people. The Councils environmental consultants have reached the same conclusion. It is the experience of the Council that blasting cm be carried out on opencast coal sites in an acceptable and safe manner without exceeding the recommended levels of vibration. The main problem appears to be the mistaken assumption by those living nearby that their properties are being damaged when the blasts cause ornaments, windows etc to rattle. This is in fact caused by vibration of the atmosphere (air overpressure) and a,b\. ground movement, as is often supposed. This matter 0 can often be addressed by the operator working closely with nearby residents on the timing and nature of the blasting operation.

8.14 Another concern of objectors is the danger of ‘fly rock’ from the blasting. However, blasting is carefully controlled by the Health and Safety Executive and I am not aware of this being a problem on other sites in North Lanarkshire.

8.15 Both Shell UK and British Gas Transco have no objections to the use of blasting in proximi5 to their pipelines subject to certain restrictions being applied.

8.16 The blasting programme would be accompanied by a monitoring programme to ensure that the stated levels are not exceeded. On the basis of the above, I have no objection to the use of blasting at this site.

Landscape and Visual Impact

8.17 Other than the undulating landform of the site, which can easily be recreated at the restoration stage, the most significant visual features on the site are the mature trees. These surround each * farm house (particularly West Badallan) and can be found in a substantial terrace between the tn-o farms. Following discussions with the applicant, further tree retention around the farms has been achieved. However. the intervening tree belts would be lost. and there appears to be no feasible tvay of both retaining these trees and working the site.

8.18 Opencast coal sites have the potential to inject a significant and detrimental impact on the visual amenity and character of wide areas. Given the site’s location adjoining 3 roads. including the A7 1 which is the main arterial routeiva!. into this part of North Lanarkshire, it would appear at first inspection to offer the potential for such a serious impact. However. there are several mitigating factors in favour of the proposal.

8.19 Firstly, all site workings are to be located to the south of the disused railway embankment which runs through the site. This will act as a visual barrier ivhen the site is viewed from most of the B70 10 to the north. For the most part. onl!. the tops of soil mounds nould be visible. It is for this reason that the Visual Impact .4ssessment which forms part the Environmental Assessment correctl!? classified the visual impact in this area to be slight. 34

8.20 From Fauldhouse, due to the railway embankment of the Shotts-Edinburgh line and an area of forestry, few locations will be afforded views of the site, and the impact of any views would be negligible.

8.2 1 To the north, Leadloch and Braehead Farms and Fauldhouse railway station are slightly elevated over the site.The ES describes the impact from the first 2 locations as moderate (it does not specifically mention the railway). However, these views will be mainly of the overburden mound, which nill be seen with a backdrop of forrestry, and views of the excavations will not be possible.

8.22 Along the southern and western edges of the site, i.e. where the site adjoins the A71 and B715, soil bunds would be positioned to assist in the screening of the workings. These bunds would be graded and grass seeded. A similar layout has been used over part of Scottish Coal’s nearby Damside Opencast site to reasonable effect. These bunds will not offer users of the road total protection from the workings of the site, and the ES describes the visual impact as moderate.

8.23 Views of the excavations from surrounding roads are unlikely for the first 2 years or so of the workings (including the West Lothian Section). Only the last 3 cuts are likely to be visible, (i.e over the last 1 !4 years of the 3 % year life of the total development).

8.24 The yard complex will be in a place for the full life of the proposal. However, this part of the site will be partially enclosed, being between a forest to the east and the wooded area of West Badallan to the west and a 5.0 m high soil bund to the south. Clear views of the yard will be restricted to a relatively short stretch of the A7 1.

8.25 At 15.0 m in height. no amount of screening will hide the proposed overburden mound, although tlie bunds and trees mentioned in the preceding paragraph nill offer it a degree of visual protection. Hon-ever. b\. grass seeding and shaping the mound, it will be possible to integrate this large feature into as natural a shape and colour as possible. The grass seeding will also assist in cutting donn on dust being blonn from the mound.

8.26 The ES sugests that the only location where the visual impact would be significant is at the farmhouse at Muldron to the south of the A7 1 which, due to its location and elevation, will look directly into the site. There are no feasible means of reducing this impact. The occupiers of the farm have not objected to the proposal.

8.27 There are other locations where clear views ma!. be had of large parts of the site e.g. from Levenseat. Hon.ever. these view are from some distance from the site thus lessening their impact.

8.28 To conclude on the matter of visual impact, I believe that the proposed norkings will not, on balance, result in a degree of visual intrusion into the surrounding area ivhich would merit the refusal of planning permission. Folloning on from this conclusion, I also believe that in terms of its wider impact, the proposals will not significantly hinder Fauldhouse or the nider area’s potential as a business or tourism centre. 35

.. Archaeolow

8.29 Whilst there are a large number of sites of archaeological interest within the application boundaries, none are of special importance. Those which will be removed will be recorded and others, outwith the working area, will be retained. The net result could therefore be argued to be a greater understanding of the archaeology of the area.

TransDortation

8.30 Access to the site would be from the A71 close to the existing farm access to West Badallan. This will involve some road widening to accommodate a right turn facility into the site. This is designed to a standard recommended by the Council as Roads Authority, and I consider its location and layout to be acceptable.

8.3 1 The access and yard area would be separated by an 80m long stretch of tarmac, and lomes leaving the site would pass through an automated high pressure wheel and underbody wash which is generally very effective. This should help prevent mud and dust being brought onto the A7 1 from the site.

8.32 Many of the objectors have identified highway safety as a key concern, particularly in relation to the additional 103.traffic that it would generate. Traffic leaving the site will travel both east and west along the A71 on roughly a 5050 basis. The proposed routes are all accessed entirely b). A class roads. which I believe to be quite capable of accommodating extra traffic of this nature and volume. The proposed routes will avoid less suitable secondary roads. Each of the 2 main routes would accommodate approximately 3/4 extra lorry loads per hour, restricted to 7.00 am to 8.00 pm Monday - Friday only.

8.33 As part of the ES, the applicant has commissioned a firm of Transportation Engineers to cam out a ‘Traffic Impact Assessment’ of the proposal. As part of this study: accident statistics were examined, but they do not show any particular risk specifically associated with HGV lorries. It concludes that due to the relatively low traffic volumes associated with the development, any increased potential risk associated with development traffic would be negligible.

8.34 There is also the matter of amenit!, to consider, in respect of noise and disturbance from the lomes, and the impact on those living on or close to the proposed routes. Taking into account the nature of the roads used and the numbers of additional loqmovements it is considered that the amenity of those people is unlikely to alter significantly. However, the Committee should note that the proposed route westwards allows traffic to pass through Allanton. Previous routing agreements for other sites e.g. at Damside and Morningside. discourage traffic from passing through Allanton. Honever. there have been no objections to this element of the proposal and I am satisfied that this option is reasonable.

8.35 Relevant policies nithin the Structure Plan and Draft Local Plan require operators to consider the possibilit!. to transporting coal by rail. In response to this matter, the applicant has stated that much of the coal will make a significant part of its journey by rail (i.e. from Mossend)? but that the incorporation of a rail siding within the site would not be feasible. (Members nil1 recall that consent to upgrade the Mossend roadrail coal handling facility was granted on 24th February 1999).

8.36 Whilst I fi~llyunderstand the depth of feeling of objectors on the issue of road safet), and ameniv, it is my opinion that anticipated impacts will not be significant, and not sufficient to allow the proposal to be refiised. 36

Site Restoration and Aftercare

8.37 The site in its present form is fairly bland in appearance, but with some items of interest, for example the mature tree belts between and around the two farmhouses. Ecologically, the potential of the site, afforded by the presence of 3 watercourses and some bog areas, was being lost, primarily due to the intensive manner in which the site was being operated. In assessing the proposed restoration scheme, I shall have in mind the opportunity afforded by the proposal in enhancing the environmental and ecological interest of the site and how this can be linked to benefits for the local community.

8.38 The original restoration plan, whilst good in parts, did not match up with my aspirations for the site. In particular, ecological benefits were limited and it did not seem to acknowledge the site’s location nithin the Breich Valley. This opinion was one shared with West Lothian’s planning officers who welcomed the proposed extension to the golf course, (whilst suggesting that the operator should assist the club more by caming out the necessary earth moving works), but questioned the need for a community woodland.

8.39 In response to the above concerns. a revised scheme was submitted which indicated the follonlng: 0

Ponds adjoining the watercourses (two in North Lanarkshire and one in West Lothian). These features will help encourage birdlife and are welcomed by several consultees.

- Tree belts widened to 30m from 20m, and sited amy from the Breich Water so as to allon- for the valley to become a more discernible and attractive visual feature.

- Embankment of disused railway to be removed: allowing for more open and attractive views of the site.

- Community woodland (in West Lothian) to be replaced by an extensive area of net grassland, thus contributing towards the bio-diversity of the area.

- Works to facilitate the extension to the golf course to be carried out by the operator.

8.40 The proposed restoration scheme would. in the long term, offer benefits visually, ecologically and to the local communi&. Further discussion on how much weight should be given to these benefits * in assessing this proposal can be found within para 8.65.

8.41 To ensure that items such as the ponds and the net grasslands are created properly. it would be for the applicant to appoint suitably qualified experts to attend to these matters. These would then be the subject of a longer than usual aftercare period ( 10 years). Also, all non-agricultural items, excluding the golf course. would be the subject of a Section 75 Agreement ensuring their protection in perpetuitj.. and preventing any invasion of the agricultural business into these areas

West Lothian Planninn Application

8.42 Consideration should be given to the possible scenario nherebjr this application is granted planning perniission. but West Lothian rehses its onn part. As the proposal stands, both parts would have to be granted for the development to proceed. but it would appear quite feasible for plans to be altered to allon the Korth Lanarkshire part to go ahead on its own. This would involve removing cuts 1 b and 2 and the retention of the un-named bum. Should such a case arise. I would suggest that the entire restoration scheme should remain unchanged i.e. including 37

.. the proposed grass wetland and golf course extensions, which are within West Lothian, as these are important elements in the applicant’s case for environmental and community benefit.

8.43 At the time of writing this report, West Lothian Council’s Director of Planning had yet to make a recommendation to his committee.

8.44 In response to West Lothian Council’s comments on this application, I would suggest that I have taken cognizance of all 4 of its recommendations.

GeolodHvdroeeoloev

8.45 The main concerns and impact relating to these matters are outlined below:

(a) Ground Stability -

The Committee will be aware of problems relating to the Drumshangie Opencast Coal Site, where workings have resulted in the ground movement around 2 public roads leading to their closure. Partly as a result of this matter, several objectors have similar concerns for the stability of the A71. In response to this matter, the applicant submitted a report from a firm of consulting civil and structural engineers which confirms that the integrity of surrounding public roads will be in no way prejudiced by the proposed workings due to the nature of the rock cover.

(b) Ferniginous Discharge

In response to the concerns of SEPA on the above matter (also referred to as Mine Water Rebound), the applicant has agreed to prepare a policy for the handling of iron rich soils found on site. After identification, they would be isolated and later encapsulated in clay and buried. This will prevent ferruginous discharge from the site at a later date, and meets with the approval of SEPA.

(c) Leachate of Pollutants from Nearbv Landfill Site

A concern of several objectors is that polluted ground water from nearby landfill sites will be found within the site. and that this will then pollute the Breich Water. Whilst this concern is understandable. information from bore holes taken on the site do not confirm this to be likely. Should it prove to be a problem in the future, then SEPA will have the power to step in and address this matter, through the discharge licence already issued by it in respect of this proposal.

8.46 A related concern of objectors is that the workings will cause the release of poisonouse gases via old mine workings. Again, bore hole information suggests that this will not be the case, but the operator nill monitor gas levels continuously.

S11 rface Water

8.47 Concerns were expressed b>*SEPA. West Lothian Council and my Department over the proximity of the proposed workings to the Breich Water. It was suggested that the Breich could partly drain away into the void nith obvious implications for the integrih of the bum and its ecology, as well as putting undue pressure on the water management and treatment system within the site. To counteract this problem, the workings were pushed back around ljm. SEPA are 38

.. now satisfied that this will adequately address this matter although suggest that water levels on the bum should be monitored.

Ecoloev

8.48 The ES suggests that the ecological value of the site is generally quite low.

8.49 The loss of the areas identified as being of higher ecological value i.e. the remnant wet heath and semi-improved grassland, is tempered by the fact that drainage and tree planting has already diminished their ecological value, and if left untouched will continue to fall.

8.50 The bums to be diverted appear to be of low ecological value, and there are obvious signs of poaching by cattle. The Breich Water is by far more important and it remains untouched.

8.5 1 Although largely outwith the application site, many consultees expressed concerns regarding the potential impacts of the workings on the surrounding bogs, particularly Springhill. The problem is that if any parts of the bogs are connected in any way to the working area, and the connection severed, then the bogs would be drained. As a result of the above, the applicant carried out a programme of bore testing to assess the estent of the bogs. This concluded that there is no inter- 0 connection and that the integrity of the bogs should remain intact.

8.52 An assessment of the potential for ecological enhancement cm be found within para 8.37-8.41

Cumulative Imuact

8.53 It is clear from reading many of the letters of objection, that many people in Fauldhouse feel that they are becoming ‘hemmed in’ by what are potentially very disruptive uses and I have some sympathy with them on this matter. As well as this proposal, West Lothian are currently considering a planning application for an opencast site to the east of the tom at Stonehead Farm. To the south are Levenseat quarry and Muldron landfill site and to the north is the dormant landfill site at Eastfield and the Polkemmet site where West Lothian is activel). encouraging the removal of bings and remains of old mine workings through an opencast development. Planning permission for the latter has previously been granted, but has now lapsed. Finally, the area to the north of the Badallan site is identified in the Structure Plan and Finalised Draft Local Plan as a preferred area for opencast coal extraction.

8.54 Despite the above, I am nevertheless of the opinion that the proposal nil1 not add to the cumulative impact to such an estent to merit a refusal of planning permission for the following reasons.-

8.55 Firstly, many of the sites mentioned above do not have planning permission, and it will be up to the Council in question to car?. out a cumulative test for the particular proposal in hand.

8.56 Secondly. the environmental consultants acting on behalf of both Councils carried out an examination of the impacts of both the Badallan and Stonehead Farm sites norking simultaneously. The conclusions were that on the basis of the lvorst case scenario, dust deposition would still be ne11 within guidelines. and that air quality uould decrease by around 5% at a small number of locations. and not van at all at others.

8.57 Finall),, despite being sited well away from Fauldhouse, the opencast site at Damside is due to stop coaling before October 2000. 39

8.58 On the basis of the above, I do not see the issue of cumulative impact as being one which would merit the refusal of planning permission. Should West Lothian disagree with this assessment, it will, of course, be able to refuse planning permission for any additional opencast site in the proximity of Fauldhouse.

Other Matters

8.59 The following is a summary of other concerns raised by objectors, along with my response.

(a) “There is no need for the coal”

Response- NPPG 4 hexA(Drafi) states that while there is no short or medium term shortage of opencast coal in Scotland, demand should nevertheless be determined by market forces. In any case, the operator is satisfied that there is a market for this particular coal, and has stated that contracts are already in place for its sale.

(b) “The site will become a landfill site when the coaling is complete”.

Resuonse

The planning application under consideration does not allow for the use of the site as a landfill site, and the applicant has stated that it is not their intention to apply for permission. Should such an application be submitted then it would be treated on its merits and the public consulted in the normal fashion. In the meantime, however, the possibility of landfill is not a consideration in the deterniination of this application.

(c) “The proposal will result in the drop in property values around the site”

Resuonse

The issue of property values is not one which is a planning consideration, and therefore should not be taken into account in the determination of this planning application.

-Policv

8.60 As stated above, there is a great deal of policy advice and guidance relating to this proposal and this section will make an assessment of how the proposal fits in with policy requirements.

8.61 Preferred area status for mineral estraction has been conferred upon the site for some time. It has featured in the Strathclyde Structure Plan since 1985 and the Mothenvell District Council Consultative Draft Local Plan since 1995. This has followed through to the 1995 Structure Plan and the 1998 Finalised Draft Local Plan. The 1982 Shotts Local Plan. whilst now rather old, does not preclude opencast coal extraction at this site.

8.62 Weight given to the adopted and draft local plans should be limited due to their respective age and status. However, a combination of the Structure Plan and the nature of emerging local plan policy lead me to believe that the principle of opencast development on this site is acceptable. with the proviso that the stated criteria within relevant policies are met. An assessment of this criteria is made elsewhere in this report. and I do not consider the proposal would result in impacts of a nature and significance which would merit the refusal of planning permission. 40

Accordingly. the proposal is considered to be in accordance with adopted and draft local and structure plan policies.

8.63 I would suggest that the other main piece of guidance to be considered is the draft annex to NPPG 4. Amongst other matters to consider, the draft guidance asks that proposals should be put to the following tests:

(a) Is the proposal environmentally acceptable, or can it be made so by the use of planning conditions or agreements?

(b) If not, does it provide local or communiv benefits which sufficiently outweigh the llkely impacts to justify the grant of planning permission?

8.64 It is my opinion that the proposal meets the requirements of the first test.

8.65 However. the guidance also asks that proposed workings should only proceed nhere they are likely to provide an overall benefits to the local conmunity. which in this case would be Fauldhouse. Of the likely benefit. the proposal will result in the ecological enhancement of the site with some landscape improvements. the removal of some spoil heaps and the provision of the golf course extension. Of the disbenefits. the most significant one (i.e. the disruption to the character and appearance of the site) is not particularly evident from within the community of Fauldhouse itself. The following is a brief assessment of how I believe the proposal noted, complies with the draft guidance's advice on how to weigh up benefits and disbenefits:-

0 the working face is 650 metres from the closest part of Fauldhouse. which is in excess of the recommended guidelines of 500 metres.

0 it will not result in an "extended extraction period' which the guidance suggests is in excess of 5 years.

0 the applicant has stated that the proposal will not be subject to repeated extensions.

0 the cumulative impact of this and other opencast sites would not be unacceptable.

0 it would not result in significant increases in road traffic passing through communities.

0 the application has been accompanied b). adequate information.

0 good provisions for restoration and aftercare have been made.

0 there are no national or international heritage designations in the vicinity

0 the proposals have taken cognisance of local amenity and uddlife interests

0 it nill not result in unacceptable levels of airbourne dust.

0 it will not result in the unacceptable contamination of ground and surface \vater.

0 it nill not result in unacceptable levels of noise. 41

.. 8.66 Weighing up the benefits and disbenefits noted above, it is my conclusion that while neither are particularly significant, the benefits will outweigh the disbenefits.

9. Conclusion

9.1 Since being submitted in July of last year, this planning application has been subjected to careh1 and extensive scrutiny by my Department, West Lothian Council environmental consultants, numerous consultees and many local people. During this time, many matters of clarification and change have been required of the applicant and these have been met on the whole. The conclusion of the assessment of many possible individual impacts of the opencast proposal, as outlined above, is that the proposal will be in accordance with adopted and emerging policy and guidance on opencast coal estraction, and that there will be no significant adverse effects on the community of Fauldhouse, (where almost all of the objectors are based). Arguably the most significant impact i.e. the alteration to the character and appearance of the site for a period of time, will not be particularly apparent to the people of Fauldhouse. Once completed, the proposal nil1 allow for some visual enhancement and the creation of properly managed and protected ecological features entirely missing from the site in its present form, and also the 0 provision of an estension to the local golf course.

9.2 Weighing up all the information before me? I recommend that planning permission be granted However, before any consent is issued by the Council, it should be noted that the following matters/steps must be satisfactorily concluded:-

(a) The application must be referred to the Secretan of State under the terms of The Tonn and Countn Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Amendment (No 2) Direction 1998.

(b) A Section 75 Agreement should be concluded, seeking to control the following matters

(I) Implementation of 10 year aftercare and management scheme for non- agricultural elements of the site. (11) Future retention of all non-agricultural items of restoration. (111) Carving out of noise and dust monitoring. (IV) Containment of ferruginous material.

(c) The deliven of a Bond of Caution of a pre-determined figure to guarantee the restoration and aftercare of the site.

9.3 The Committee should be an’are that if planning permission for this proposal is granted, the monitoring of site operations will require a considerable committment b!. this Department in terms of time.

9.4 The Committee is reminded that some of the objectors have requested a hearing before a decision is made on the planning application. 42

._ APPENDIX

Planning Application No. S/98/00969/MIN : CONDITIONS

(1) That no development shall commence on site until West Lothian Council have issued a valid planning permission for the proposed development covered by planning application ref. no. 0606/M/ 1998.

Reason: The proposed development as it currently stands, cannot be worked independently of the West Lothian part of the development site.

TIME LIMITS

That the development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 2 years from the date of this consent, and that the applicant shall give the Planning Authority at least 7 days written prior notice of his intention to commence work. 0 Reason: In order that the Planning Authority might make appropriate arrangements to monitor the operations, and to take account of changing circumstances.

That all mineral extraction operations shall cease within 3 % years from the date of commencement of the development, which date shall be determined by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To accord with the submitted details and to give the Planning Authority the opportunity to review their position.

That the site shall be restored to final contour levels as specified in figure no. 4.2 within tlie Environmental Statement, no later than 1 year after the cessation of mineral extraction. tlie date of which shall be determined by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In accordance with submitted details and to ensure the timeous restoration of the site.

That all excavation, associated operations, crushing and screening shall only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am and 7.00pm Monday to Friday inclusive (excluding national public holidays), and there shall be no working at any other times.

Reason:In the interests of amenity.

That without the express written consent of the Planning Authority, and within the exigencies of any Health and Safety requirements, only essential maintenance, servicing and testing of plant and equipment shall take place between the hours of 07.00 and 13-00on a Saturda) .

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

That no coal shall be removed from the site except between the hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm Mondays to Fridays and excluding national public holidays.

... 43

Reason: In the interests of amenity

(8) That this permission only allows for tlie removal of coal from the site, and no other materials including topsoil or subsoil shall be removed at any time, and no materials including refuse, bulk material or coal shall be imported to the site for any purpose at any time without tlie prior written approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise vehicle movements and in the interest of sound land management.

VEHICULAR ACCESS AND RELATED MATTERS

(9) That the only vehicular access to and from the site shall .be from tlie A71 at the position shown on approved plans.

Reason: In the interests of road safety,

(1 0) That the vehicular access shall be constructed in accordance with the details specified in 0 plans nos C0001,2 + 3 which accompanied the planning application and for the avoidance of doubt shall accord with tlie undernoted requirements:-

(a) visibility splays of 9.0 m x 215 m to be maintained

(b) 10.5 m kerb radii with 7.3 in wide access

(c) existing access to West Badallan Farin to be closed off before proposed access conies into use.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

(1 1) That prior to any works being commenced within the application site other than the formation of the compound, parking areas, site accommodation and associated engineerin? works, tlie creation of the access works as required by condition (10). shall be completed in fdl.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

(12) That prior to the removal of any coal from tlie site, wheel cleaning equipment shall be installed as described in approved drawings and maintained throughout the duration of the operations, and in the event of any deposit of mud or any other material on the public road. the deposits sliall be cleared as soon as possible.

Reason: To prevent mud or detritus being carried onto the public roads in the interests of road safety.

(13) That all vehicles leaving tlie site carrying coal shall be fully covered by haps or sheets to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise dust emissions and to prevent material falling onto tlie public roads in the interests of amenity and road safety. 44

(14) That tlie main site access shall be paved or finished in a sealed surface material for its length between the wheel wash and the public road.

Reason: In the interests of public safety and to prevent deleterious material being carried onto tlie highway.

(1 5) That advanced warning signs shall be placed at positions on the A71 to be agreed with the Planning Authority, warning drivers of the existence of an access to an opencast coal site. and these shall be in place prior to the removal of any coal from the site and shall be maintained in a satisfactory condition throughout the duration of the mineral extraction operations.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

(16) That before development starts, details of the surface finishes to all parking and manoeuvring areas shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Authority.

Reason: These details have not been submitted.

(1 7) That the proposed routing of lorry traffic from the site shall accord with those details contained within the planning application, and any material alterations to the proposed routing must be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and amenity.

SOIL STRIPPING AND STORAGE, ETC.

(1 8) That the operations and works hereby approved shall be carried out in strict accordance with approved details and no amendments to this working scheme shall be implemented without the prior approval of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In order that the Planning Authority might retain effective control in the interests of amenity and land management.

(19) That at least 48 hours notice shall be given to the Planning Authority before any soil stripping commences aiid at the request of the Planning Authority, the extent of areas to be stripped shall be pegged out in advance.

Reason: To allow the Planning Authority the opportunity to assess the suitability of weather and ground conditions.

(20) That no movements of soil shall take place except when the full depth of soil to be stripped. or otherwise transported, is in a suitably dry soil moisture condition, and conditions are sufficiently dry for the topsoil to be separated from the subsoil.

Reason: In the interests of soil management.

(31) That the topsoil and subsoil shall be stored in separate mounds, as illustrated generally on the approved working plans; and the topsoil and subsoil mounds shall be graded. srass seeded aiid managed throughout their respective periods of storage, and the overburden mound. once at its final size, shall be graded to an even slope and grass seeded. 45

._ I Reason: In the interests of soil management, visual amenity and to minimise dust emissions.

(22) That the soil mounds referred to in condition (21) above shall be formed and removed as required in accordance with a soil mound phasing plan to be agreed in advance of any soil stripping operations on site.

Reason: To ensure maximum possible protection from potential noise, dust and visual impacts from the workings.

(23) That the following conditions shall be observed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority:-

(a) before any part of the site is excavated or is traversed by heavy vehicles or machinery (except for the purpose of stripping that part), or is built iipon. or is used for the stacking of subsoil or overburden, all available topsoil shall be stripped from that part of the site;

(b) before the overburden mound is created in the position illustrated on the approved plans, all available subsoil as well as topsoil shall be stripped from that part of the site;

(c) subsoil as well as topsoil shall be stripped from all areas to be excavated for the compound, haul roads and other areas to be traversed by heavy machinery;

(d) the overburden mound shall not exceed 15m in height and

(e) all areas of the site left undisturbed, and all topsoil, subsoil and overburden mounds shall be kept free from weeds throughout the duration of the operations.

Reason: In the interests of soil management and amenity.

NOISE AND BLASTING

NOTE:- CONDITIONS RELATING TO NOISE, BLASTING, AND DUST ARE CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW IN CONSULTATION WITH WEST LOTHIAN COUNCIL AND THEY MAY BE SUBJECT TO ALTERATION

(24) That the proposal shall accord with a 'noise action plan' and 'blasting action plan' to be agreed by the Planning Authority in advance of any works commencing on site.

Reason: In the interests of amenity

(35) That notwithstanding the terms of condition (24) above, noise levels emanating from the site caused by excavation and associated operations, including transport. maintenance. crushing and screening shall not cause the following noise levels to be exceeded at noise sensitive properties:

55dB Laeq (1 hour) between the hours of 07.00 and 19.00 Monday to Friday inclusive and the hours of 07.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays.

Reason: In the interests of amenity. 46

.. I (26) That notwithstanding the terms of condition (24) above, noise levels caused by soil stripping and the creation of bunds shall not exceed 70dB Laeq (1 hour) at any noise sensitive property, between tlie hours of 07.00 to 19.00 Monday to Friday inclusive, for a period not exceeding 8 weeks in one year.

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

(27) That the noise and blasting action plans shall include a programme for monitoring noise and vibration generated by tlie operation of tlie site (including measurement locations. frequency of monitoring and methodology), tlie conclusion of which shall be made available to tlie Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to allow for the proper monitoring of fioise and blasting in the interests of amenity.

(28) That the noise action plan shall include procedures for the investigation by tlie operator of exceedence of noise levels (as set out in conditions (25 and 26) above): and where identified. any operations giving rise to noise levels exceeding specified limits shall be suspended until 0 such time as appropriate remedial action is implemented. A log book shall be kept on site. and be available for inspection at any reasonable time by an officer of the Planning Authority, detailing the excedence, the subsequent investigation and any remedial action implemented.

Reason: In order to allow for the proper control of noise from the site in the interests of amenity.

(29) That the noise and blasting action plans shall iiiclude procedures in instances where relevant noise and vibration conditions are not complied with because of an emergency, and in such instances the operator shall, as soon as possible, and in any event not later than 14 days after the breach, provide tlie Planning Authority in writing of details of tlie nature of tlie emergency and reasons why the noise/vibration condition was not adliered to.

Reason: To allow for the proper control of noise and blasting at the site in tlie interests of amenity.

(30) That tlie noise and blasting action plans shall include procedures for dealing with complaints a from local residents, and in particular the operator shall carry out investigation to establish the justification (or otherwise) of tlie complaint. Details of the complaint, the likely cause and any relevant remedial action shall be entered in a log book held on site and available for inspection at any reasonable time by an officer from tlie Planning Authority.

Reason: To allow for tlie proper control of noise and blasting at the site in the interests of am en ity .

(3 1) That notwithstanding the generality of condition (24) above. blasting at tlie site shall comply with tlie following:

(a) blasting to be confined to the hours of 10.30 and 16.00 Monday to Friday inclusive. excluding national bank holidays. 47

._ P (b) without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority, within the exingincies of any Health and Safety requirements, the number of blasts shall not exceed two any one one week, with a maximum of one blast per day.

(c) no blasting shall be carried out during a temperature inversion and blasting shall be avoided under weather conditions which are likely to direct the blast air overpressure towards noise sensitive properties.

(d) blasting shall only take place when preceded by visible and audible warnings. Prior to the commencement of operations on the site, the occupiers of all properties around the site shall be notified in writing of the nature of warnings.

(e) appropriate blasting techniques shall be adopted anti instantaneous charge levels selected such that the resultant peak particle velocity shall not exceed 6mm/s in any one plane in 95% of all blasts and no individual blast shall exceed peak particle velocity of 1Omm/s as would be measured at any vibration sensitive property.

(0 the operator shall notify the Planning Authority and the occupiers of any vibration sensitive property by writing in advance (at least 24 hours notice) of any blast. The notification shall include the intended blasting programme and any subsequent changes.

(g) the operator shall submit details of procedures for the notification of blasting to Transco and Shell UK in respect of their adjoining pipelines.

Reason: In order to properly control blasting operations at the site, in the interests of amenity.

(32) That all vehicles and mobile plant on site shall be properly maintained, and provided with suitable and effective silencers where appropriate, or provided with full acoustic screening

Reason: To minimise noise generation from plant/vehicle movement in the interest of amenity.

(33) That all vehicles and plant used within the site shall be fitted with reverse warning equipment I) which adjusts their noise level automatically to 5dB(A) above the ambient noise level. Reason: To ensure that no noise nuisance emanates from the site in the interests of amenit!..

DUST

(34) That tlie proposal shall coinply with the terms of a 'dust action plan' to be agreed wit11 the Planning Authority in advance of any works commencing 011 site.

Reason: To minimise dust generation from the site in the interests of amenity.

(35) That notwithstanding the generality of condition (34) above. the action plan shall accord I\ it11 the following:

(a) dust suppression equipment. including water spray equipment, shall be available on site at all times and used as required to prevent dust emissions from the site. All areas likel> to give rise to airborne dust shall be watered at regular intervals to prevent an). dust emission adversely affecting adjoining land or residents. 48

a programme for the monitoring of dust generated by the operation of the site, including measurement locations. frequency of monitoring and methodology. The results of this monitoring shall be submitted to the Planning Authority as soon as possible after they become available, and the site operator shall make further provision for reasonable additional measurements following a request by the Planning Authority.

any adverse increase in dust levels, due to site operations, shall be immediately investigated by the site operator. Where identified any operations giving rise to adverse increases in dust levels shall be suspended until such time as appropriate fast measures have been implemented. A log book shall be held on site and be available for inspection at any reasonable time, by an officer of the Planning Authority, detailing any such adverse increases in dust levels, tlie subsequent inveStigations and my remedial action implemented.

where a local resident has cause to make a complaint about dust generated froin the site. the site operator shall carry out investigations to establish tlie justification, or otlier\\ise. of the complaint. Details of the complaint tlie likely cause and relevant remedial action shall be entered in a log book, held on site. Said log book shall be kept available for inspection at any reasonable time by an officer of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise dust generation from the site in the interests of amenity.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, ETC.

That prior to the commencement of any earthworks within the site, secure fencing of a specification, height, style and position to be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority shall be erected around the perimeter of the working area of the site.

Reason: In the interests of public safety.

That all perimeter fences and gates shall be inspected regularly and a log kept of all these inspections the results of whicli will be made available, if required, by the Plaiining Authority.

Reason: In the interests of public safety.

That no trees shall be removed without the prior approval of the planning authoritc. and for tlie avoidance doubt, the proposal will allow for the retention of those trees itnmediatei>,to the east and south of East Badallan Farm, those trees around and to tlie north of W’est Badallan Farm, and the mature trees adjoining the A71 at its juiictioii with the B7 15.

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

That all hedges and trees within the site to be retained shall be maintained and protected froin damage by appropriate temporary fencing where required throughout the duration of the operations until restoration is completed. the position of the fencing to be agreed with the Planning Authority.

Reason: In tlie interests of amenity. 49

(40) That no stripping of topsoil or deposition of any material shall be carried out within 3 metres of any hedge or the canopy of any tree, and no excavation works shall take place within 17in of the canopy of any tree.

Reason: To protect the existing vegetation, and in accordance with submitted detai Is.

(41) That for the avoidance of doubt, an area of 30m alongside the Breich Water shall be kept free of all development, including the siting of soil mounds, formation of drainage ditches etc and this area shall be protected by feiiciiig of a specification to be agreed in advance by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect and enhance the Breich Water and its setting, and in accordance with tlie terms of submitted details.

(42) That no development shall take place within the site until the developer has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the developer for the prior approval of the Planning Authority and which complies fully with terms of reference to be issued by the West of Scotland Archaeology Service on the Authority’s behalf.

Reason: In accordance with submitted details, and to ensure the proper protection and recording of archaeological remains.

(43) That measures shall be taken to ensure that drainage from areas adjoining the site is not impaired or rendered less efficient by the operations hereby permitted, and adequate precautions shall be taken to prevent the pollution of ditches, watercourses and drains \vithiii and adjacent to the site to the satisfaction of SEPA and the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of water management and to prevent pollution of natural watercourses.

(44) That settling ponds shall be provided within the site to the satisfaction of tlie Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA.

Reason: To prevent pollution of natural watercourses.

(45) That any oil, fuel, lubricant or other potential pollutant shall be handled on the site in such a manner as to prevent pollution of any watercourse or groundwater. For any liquid other than water, this shall include storage in suitable tanks housed within a suitable bund or other means of enclosure to provide containment for 1 10% of the storage capacity and with no passive means of discharge.

Reason: To ensure adequate precautions are taken to prevent pollution of natural watercourses.

(46) That before any soil stripping or other escavation works commence within cut 6. a supplement to the ’Weeks’ report on Springhill Bog, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval in consultation with SNH, and this shall comprise tlie following-

-. 50

.. I (a) 2 exploritory borelioles, in locations to be agreed in advance, but approximatelq around NS X and NS Y, and the submission of their findings.

(b) Based on the conclusions of (a) above, the submission of a revised working area shouid there found to be any adverse impacts of the site workings 011 the liydrologq of the adjoining bogs.

Reason: To ensure the protection of the bogs in the interests of nature conservation.

(47) That the site shall operate in accordance with the terms and conditions set out within tlie report entitled, "Details for Site Works Associated with Water and Workings in Coal Seams" and where there is any conflict with planning conditions, then the planning conditions will take precedance.

Reason: In the interests of good water management.

(48) That the proposed development shall accord with the terms of a 'ferruginous soil action plan' to be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval in consultation with SEPA prior to works commenciiig on site), and this shall outline procedures for the identification. 0 isolation, storage, encapsulation, burryiiig and recording of such material.

Reason: In the interests of sound level management, and to minimise post restoration po 1lu t i on.

(49) That before works comiiience on site, measures designed to mitagate impacts on bird life within the site shaii be submitted to the Planning Authority in consultation n.ith RSPB. and this shall include the establishment of weedy and rough edges around the operational site.

Reason: To protect birdlife in the vicinity of the site in the interests of nature conservation.

(50) That before works commence on site, a monitoring regime and action plan centeriiig on the Breich Water shall be submitted to the Planning Authority in consultation with SEPA and this shall address the following matters: (a) Details of means of assessing water levels at 2 points including details and locations. r) (b) Details of a regular monitoring programme, results of which shall be made available. if required, to the Planning Authority.

(c) Details of appropriate mitagation measures should the conclusions of (a) and (b) above indicate the de-watering of the Breich Water into the site workings.

Reason: To protect the integrity of the Breich Water in the interests of sound water management.

(5 1) That within 6 months of works commencing on site. an "otter ledge" or drq culvert of a specification to be agreed in advance bq tlie Plaiining Authority in consuitation M it11 SNH. shall be installed beneath the Muldron Bridge.

Reason: To minimise otter deaths on the A71 in the interests of nature conservation. 51

..

RESTORATION

That before development starts, a phased restoration plan sliall be submitted for tlie approval of tlie Plaiining Authority, and for tlie avoidance of doubt. this plan sliall be based on tlie revised plan dated 14/1/99 wliicli forms part of this planning permission.

Reason: To ensure enhanced site restoration.

(53) That the restoration of the site shall be carried out in accordance with tlie filial contours and other details illustrated on figure 4.2 of the Environmental Statement hereby approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of proper land management.

(54) That, as far as is reasonably practicable, restoration of the site shall be carried out progressively in accordance with the approved details to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: To minimise tlie period of environmental disruption.

(55) That, notwithstanding conditions (52) above, tlie follolving conditions shall be observed in the restoration of tlie site to tlie satisfaction of tlie Planning Authority-

following the replacement of overburden, and before the replacement of subsoi I. tlie upper layers of tlie overburden shall be rooted and cross-rooted to a depth of 5OOiiiiii. with boulders and stones exceeding 250mm in one dimension being removed from the site or buried on the site at a considerable depth;

all available subsoils sliall be re-spread evenly in separate layers of 3OOmm depth and each layer shall be rooted and cross-rooted, nith boulders and stones exceeding 150mm in one dimension being removed;

all subsoil areas which have been used for the storing of other subsoil or topsoil sliall be rooted and cross-rooted in a similar manner to (b) above;

following tlie replacement of subsoil, all available topsoil shall be re-spread evenly to achieve tlie final level and configuration, and shall be rooted and cultivated as required with all stones exceeding lOOinm in one dimension being removed:

all operations involving subsoil and topsoil replacement and cultivation shall only be carried out when the fidl volume of soil involved is in a suitably dry soil moisture condition to minimise soil damage and to maximise the effects of the rooting operations. and

that at least 48 hours notice shall be given to the Planning Authority of intention to spread subsoil and topsoil to allow for inspection ofthe area by tlie said Authority.

Reason: In the interests of sound soils management. 52

..

(56) That upon cessation of mineral extraction, all settlement ponds shall be emptied of slurry. filled with dry inert material and restored. and all areas of hardstanding shall be broken up and restored.

Reason: In the interests of effective land management.

(57) That within three months of the completion of the restoration of the site required in terms of conditions (52) above, all fixed equipment, plant, machinery and building shall be removed from the site and the access and road widening works restored to its previous condition..

Reason: In the interests of amenity and road safety.

AFTERCARE

(58) That at least three months prior to the replacement of topsoil on any phase of the site. a 5 year aftercare scheme for areas defined in the restoration plan as ‘agricultural‘ shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval, and the scheme shall specify such steps as may be necessary to bring the land to a standard suitable for agricultiiral use and shall iiiclude cultivating, fertilising following soil sampling and analysis, watering, draining and otherwise treating the land.

Reason: In the interests of sound land management.

(59) That before any works coininence on site, a 10 year aftercare scheine for areas defined in tlie restoration plan as ‘non-agricultural’ shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for approval, and the scheme shall be prepared and implemented by suitably q~ialifiedexperts oii the individual elements of the scheme.

Reason: In the interests of sound land management and nature conservation.

(60) That the aftercare scheme required in terms of condition (58) above shall take account of Appendix I11 of SDD Circular No. 5/1982, and the aftercare of the site shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of sound land management.

(61) That the requirements of condition (58 and 59) above shall be carried out in accordance it11 the agreed timescale and shall be managed to the satisfaction of the Planning .4uthorit> in accordance with tlie agreed prescriptions during the relevant aftercare period.

Reason: In the interests of amenity.

(62) That, before 3 1st July of every year during the aftercare period. a report shall be submitted to the Planning Authority recording the operations carried out during the previous 12 months and setting out the intended operations for the next 12 months.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory aftercare of the site.

(63) That, before 3 1st August of every year during the aftercare period. a site meeting shall be arranged with the Planning Authority to discuss the report prepared in accordance with condition (62) above. 53

* Reason: To ensure the efficient monitoring of the aftercare of the site.

(64) That temporary signs shall be erected around the perimeter of the site warning the public of deep excavations. . Reason: In the interests of public safety. General

(65) That from the commencement of the operations to the completion of the restoration works, a copy of this permission including all the documents hereby approved and any other documents subsequently approved in accordance -with this permission shall always be on display at the site during normal working hours.

Reason: To facilitate the effective monitoring of the site by the Planning Authority.

c 54

NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL

REPORT

TO: PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE Subject: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. S/98/00 9 6 9/MIN EXTRACTION OF COAL BY c From: ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND OPENCAST METHODS AT ENVIRONMENT BADALLAN FARM, BY FAULDHOUSE

UPDATE REPORT Date: 22nd June 1999 1 Ref S/PL/B/I 7/57/CLK/JM

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to update members on matters arising in connection with the proposed opencast coal development at Badallan Farms, in the time since the application was first 0 considered by the Planning and Development Committee at its meeting of 17 March 1999.

NPPG 16

2. Since preparing my previous report, the Government’s draft policy on opencast coal, as contained within NPPG4: Annex A (Draft), has been replaced by NPPG 16: Opencast Coal and Related Minerals, which was adopted as Government Policy in March 1999. I do not believe that the new advice differs greatly from the draft guidance, and it does not give me any reason to alter my opinion on the merits of the proposed development. In particular, there are no significant changes to the advice given on how to weigh up the benefits and disbenefits of a proposal as outlined in paragraph 8.65 of the main application report.

Planning Conditions

3. As noted in my previous report, the proposed planning conditions were to be the basis of some fine tuning and the subject of further discussions with West Lothian Council Department of Development and Building Control. The proposed alterations are included at Appendix A e attached to this report. There are two main changes proposed, and these are as follows:-

(a) Condition no. 48 required the submission of a femginous material action plan. On reflection, it is now considered that such a matter cannot be adequately controlled by a planning condition. Instead, it will form part of the Section 75 Agreement.

(b) Since preparing my last report, I have had further input on the matter of land stability in and around the A71. In particular, the Director of Construction Services has recommended to me that further details should be submitted so that the Council can be entirely satisfied that no impact is likely. This can be dealt with by means of a suspensive planning condition.

BADALLAN.DOC 55

West Lothian Council

4. West Lothian Council has still to consider the planning application relating to its own area. The likely recommendation and timescale for a decision is not yet known. i 5. As stated in my previous report, West Lothian Council were in the process of seeking the opinion of Lothian Health Board on the potential impact of the proposals on the health of local people. At the time of writing this report, discussions between the two parties were still on-going.

Further Representations

6. Two further letters of representation have been received by West Lothian Council, and they have been passed to me for consideration. The first is another pro-forma letter from a resident of Fauldhouse (in addition to the 723 similar letters already received) and the other is a further letter from the environmental action group ‘LACE’. In my opinion, neither letter raises issues which were not addressed in my previous report.

Recommendation

7. It is recommended that the Committee notes the content of the above report, and thereafter grants planning permission in accordance with my previous recommendation, but subject to the altered conditions as noted within the attached Appendix.

I G Lawson ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

Date:- 15th June 1999

For further information please contact Mr Kellock on 01698 302102.

- Planning Application S/98/00969/MIN - NPPG16 - Opencast Coal and Related Minerals - Letter from ‘LACE’ dated 27/3/99 - ‘Pro-forma’ letter from A. Reynolds, 4 Glebe Court, Main Street, Fauldhouse dated 23/4/99.

BADALLAN.DOC 56

Planning Application No. S/98/00969/MIN Appendix A I

Condition No.

4. This condition to be re-worded as follows:-

That the restoration of the site shall comply with the following terms:

The overburden mound shall be removed in its entirety within 6 months of the cessation of mineral extraction.

The site shall be restored in accordance with the approved restoration plan (as required by condition No 52) within one year of the cessation of mineral extraction.

That for the avoidance of doubt, the date of cessation of mineral extraction shall be determined by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the timeous restoration of the site in the interests of amenity.

31. In section (9) of this condition, Railtrack should be added to the list of notified bodies.

41. This condition shall be re-worded to ensure the erection of fencing before other works commence on site.

46. OS co-ordinates to read NS291078658975 and NS291651658800.

48. This condition is to be deleted and instead will form part of the Section 75 Agreement.

48. Replace the deleted planning condition with the following:

That before any works commence at Cut 6, a detailed report, to be submitted by suitably qualified experts, shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval, and this shall confirm the stability of the ground in and around the A71, and these details shall include:

(a) cross sections of slope angles through superficial deposits and rock strata, proposed bench widths and bench heights in the rock slope, total width of excavation and the location within the section of coal seams indicating whether the seam is intact or has been mined previously.

BADALLAN.DOC 57

(b) Location of former mineworkings.

(c) An assessment of the impact of blasting on the above.

Reason To ensure the stability of land outwith the application site in the interests of public safety.

51. This condition to be replaced by the following:-

That before works commence on site, details of otter protection measures (including details of a timescale for the implementation of approved measures) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority for its prior approval in consultation with SNH.

Reason In the interests of nature conservation.

BADALLAN.DOC 1

NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL

REPORT

TO: PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE Subject: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. S/98/00969/MIN EXTRACTION OF COAL BY From: ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND OPENCAST METHODS AT ENVIRONMENT BADALLAN FARMS,BY FAULDHOUSE LAW MINING LTD.

~~ ~ ~ Date: 22nd June 1999 Ref: S/PL/B/17/57/CLK/JM UPDATE REPORT No. 2

a Purpose of Report 1. The purpose of this report is to further update members on matters arising in connection with the proposed opencast coal development at Badallan Farms, since my earlier update report of 15 June.

West Lothian Council

2. West Lothian Council’s Development & Building Control Manager has advised me that, having received comments from Lothian Health Board’s Consultant in Public Health Medicine, he is not prepared to refer LAW’Splanning application and the one from Cobex on the other side of Fauldhouse to his Strategic Services Committee until research which is currently being carried out at Newcastle University on behalf of the Department of Transport and the Regions (DETR) and the Department of Health in England and Wales into the health effects of opencast mining has been published.

3. He also states that, “it would be unfortunate if North Lanarkshire Council were to determine the application without a consultation with Lanarkshire Health Board and in advance of the publication of the Newcastle report”. Effectively, West Lothian are imposing a ‘moratorium’ on opencast coal working until further advice is issued by the Government. I would refer you to Section 8 of my report on the planning application (paras. 8.2 to 8.8), and remind you that, notwithstanding that further research is being carried out, the Scottish Office have not imposed a moratorium on new proposals for opencast coal working.

4. With respect to West Lothian’s comments about North Lanarkshire consulting the Lanarkshire Health Board, it was agreed, after a meeting on 1 March between planning and environmental health officials of both Councils, that such a consultation was not necessary in light of the Scottish Office advice (PAN 50 & PAN 50 Annex B, and NPPG 16) and the findings of Stanger, the Consultants engaged by both Council’s to advise on the issues of noise and dust.

5. I enclose a copy letter dated 17 June 1999 from West Lothian Council together with a copy letter dated 9 June 1999 to West Lothian from Lothian Health Board for the information of the Committee.

cont...... /

BADALLA3.DOC 2

Recommendation

7. It is recommended that the Committee notes the content of this second update report, and thereafter determines the planning application as they consider appropriate in light of the latest correspondence from West Lothian Council.

I G Lawson ACTING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

Date:- 18th June 1999

For further information please contact Mr McInnes on 01698 302089

List of Background Papers

- Planning Application Report : S/98/00969/MIN - Update Report dated 15 June 1999 - Letter dated 17 June 1999 from West Lothian Council enclosing letter dated 9 June 1999 from the Consultant in Public Health Medicine, Lothian Health Board.

......

BADALLA3.DOC !II

West Lothian Dwelopmem 6 Building bnbol8mKlgw Council UichardHarthnd Environmentat & Protective Services Courg Buildings OUrRcf: KWLB Linliigow West lcrthii Your Rcfi EF1497Q calling please ask for: Heywood If Ms K .L Td 01266 77m DktDial No: 01506 775225 Fuc 01sod 775255 DX No 540883 Linliigow

17 June 1999

Department of Planning and Environment 0 Southm Division 303 Brandon Street MOTHERWI&L MLl 1RS

Dwr Sir

LAW OPENCAST SITE AT BADALLAN, FAWLDHOUSE.

I understand that North Lanarkshire Will be considering LAWS planning application for opencast coal extraction at Badallan Fann, Fauldhouse at a meeting of the Planning and Envirorunmt Committee on 22 June. * At a meeting on Keith Johnstone and Crawford Morgan gave Lindsay Kelloch and Robert Q&& a copy of a draft letter from Dr Pauline Upton from Lothian Health Board commenting on the likely health implications of the opencast site. This letter has now been finalised and I enclose a ppy for your attention. Keith and Crawford had understood that North Lmskshbe, in the light of I2Upton's resematiom, would consult Dr Donnachy at Lanarkshire Health Board for an opinion. Ifthis has been done I would appmiate a copy of the reply

Thelocal people in Faddhouse who may be afllketed by the LAW opencast site will want to be convinced that their health is not going to be detximentdly affected if the site is approvtd. At the moment, given Dr Upton's comments, we do not feel coddent to be able to recommend approval.

As you know, research is currently being carried out at Newcastle University on behalf of the DETR and Department of Health in England and Wales into the health effects of opencast mining. Our understanding is that publication of this research is imminent. It/ 4 ?

. . .., .... ;., !k .. . .. *_'...... ,.'.C,. . -2 - t ^. ..

It is OLU intention to refer both LAWS application and that &om Cobex for an opencast sit0 on the other side of Faddhouse to our Strategic Services Committee only when the research from Newcastle has been published and we are in a better position to make recommendatiom on the planning applications,

Given that in the LAW case, North Lanarkshire is handling approximately 75% of the site area I and only 25% is being dealt with by West Lothian, it would be &ortunate ifNorth Lanarkshire were to determine the application without a consultation with Lanarkshire Health Bodand in advance of the publication of the Newcastle report.

I would be grateful if you could bring this letter to the attention of your Committee. Yours faithfillly a

cer - Development Co-ordination 17-JUN-1999 16:87 FROM W L C -JW-1993 14:32 GOl WICRBLE OlS

09 June 1999 Mi. Crawford Morgan WeElt'Latbian Cod CoantpBuiidings * High Street r;n'ithgw Ea49 mz

Dear Crawfurd. a

Two opencast cad sites am pmpvsed at Badallan and Stoaehead F-. Fa;ilahowe lies fo the northeast of RadaJlaa in the dtirection of the predominant swd Westiezly wind. Stoaehead farm lies to the northeast of Faoldhouse, irr upwind oftbe tom centre but mekordogkd reponrs indicate that the wiad blows from the northeast about uparter to a third &be year. Thus Faaldhouse is likely to be erposed to the dust dedfhm one or ofher ate br &e duration of the mithgopemtiarur, about 4 years in total, With maximum dust lev& in the dtst 12 - 18 months of operationS. The moat likely cause uf deleterious health efkts in the coxnmuriity are dwt, rr&r ash increased road trSccaused by the dahgoperation. - The uatiOnal gkumhr PO& middine NPPG16 J Simg at eafeguardhg erristing mmfXSUPities and environments from &e hardid effects ofOpanr?ast mining, The Stager dust hagact aasaameat, cornrnissioned by West Lothian Council, has taken accouilt of the protective measures that will be taken to duce dust flow following the aatiod (llf guidelines. Dust is a very betexagenous substan- and the paxticles within the dust vary coasidarablyb Sits. The larger particles will no$ be inspired. "he Stauge~ht hpact awesameat has estimated the b-d htdepoSitian rate in Faddhowe to be 35mg per met& per day (43.3). The results of the diwersioa modelting would indicrtte that the averagct dust &poSiaorr rab be of the mder wf60mg pex mek@ per day well below the published nuhanm guidebe of 200*360 mghg per day. Therdure dust levels are unlikely to be a cause of kitation or meatal health pmbIenro.

PHlO dust M dehed aa particles with B dimetet less than 10 mictans; thoee pddw less than 2.5 microns Weter will reach the lung alveoli and probabb aweharmful effeas. The chemical mpodtion of the PM10 partides varies. PM10 at 0pm-t sites are likely to consist of cad-duat, minerals, soil and diesel emission partides 0li;f).The Faddhouse backgxound levd ofPMlO is 15.1 &m8 based on the TEOM xefererrce metbod (equivalent to l9.6pg rn3 using the gravimetzic method). The 24 hour mean coocentration afPM10 is 48 pg/d just below the National Air Quality mdardOVAQS) af50rrgM. (4.2-9). The highest PMlO LmJs axe Udy to be in &e mt year of operation when the tupsoil is being removed and mining operations are underway measuring sites. Stangers disperaion modebg estimated that PMlO levels will wacb 15% over and above the backgrwad Iwd. (8.3).

The evidence of health cfsects bmopencak miningia mainly taket, hm OwpationalMeairn’Daresearch carried out on the miners tbdveabut a few studies have looked at the &kts on the local community. The lodcommdty ia not only hemgenous Cyowg and elderly, fit and unfit people) but also may be expwed to ’ lower conceatzations ofPM10 for longer periads thaa the workfaxce. Conceatrathxw that are acceptable for healthy men, &art tenn, in the working environmeat may not be safe foa longer periods of exposue. Lower levels may wsll be harmful to susceptible hhiduds such a8 those With Xegpiratory =ea, tbe pugaad the elderly. Therefore 0 e#tragolatiag the occupational medicine data perhising to miners inta the commuaity is impnadent. -

Temple and Sykes 0 in Walm noted a sidcsnt increase in the weekly numbem of general practice consdtathw for new episodes of &a - a heha 4.4 per week to i 7.9 per weak after an opencast site opened.

The Lanarkshire study wing a geographic information system &owed a statWcally sipikant association betweea hospital adnriadm and living dose to an active opencast &e. Tbe atudy aLsc showed an association between the duration of operations and a rising rate afrespiratov disease in the downwind community, Le. a dose reiated effect.

Seabn et d suggested that partides below 1micMn in diameter may remain suspeadedin the air fot week8 aad drift for mapp de& They propose that;thme i partieles may not only cawe atate respiratarp illnew but alao change the &ad coagulability &tiendy to 8-t for an increase in cardiwdax deaths aad acute .I idtapirnit episodes associated with p8rficulate pallutiorr.

Prescott et al 0 in their paper looking at urbculr poUutiox~concluded that there was a slnall but aigDificent associatioa between conmatratioas of black onsolre @art uf which is made up. of the PMld particles) and reagiratxuy mortaliw in the older age group.

COMEAP 6 quote Docke~rydad Pope 1994 who eetiraated that for each lOug/ma base in PMlO there wiIl be a variable percentage rise in various health indhtoxs for example 3%rise in sbaattacks; I%&e in A & E Visits; 1.9 94 increaae in hospital admissions and 5.4% increase ia respiratory deaths.

91w ,. ,. I. ., a* .. p? , ... .. t

COWhave etated more work Is needed before a definitive opinion c~dbe givea 00 the &&a dopencast mining on the health ofthe local populatia Bemuch currentLy beiag undertakerr in Ndesihould be avdable Lam this year. Yours Sinwrely

1. National Plnnning Policy &sideline NPIPG16.6~5ttid1Office 2. Temple J M F, Sykes A M. Asthma and Openat Mining. BMJ 1992: 305 396- 7.

S. Leung G, Douglas A ]Does Opemcast Mining increase respiratory disease? J. Epidemical. Comznunitp Health 1998: 52: 676

4. Seatoa A. MacNee W, DonaLdson 3% Godden K, Particulate air pdution yid acute health deck. Lsmcet 199CI; 3%176-0.

, UibmAjz 6. - P~~ttGJ,CohenGR,nrvrnRAFowkesFGR,AyisRM. Pollution and Caxdiopulmmary ID Health: A 146 year time serbstudy. OOEop. Environ Med 1998: 65: 697 - 704. 6. Coarmittee on the Medid EEbcui of Aix Pollutaats (COW (1997) Handbook on Air Pollution and Health. HMSO