______

An Bord Pleanála

Inspector’s Report

Ref.: PL19. 222320

Development: A 3.3 hectare extension to an existing registered quarry (QY 68) for the extraction of sand and gravel deposits.

Ballydownan, Ballycristal, Geashill, Co. Offaly.

PLANNING APPLICATION

Planning Authority: Offaly County Council

Planning Authority Ref.: 06/1165

Applicant: Ballycrystal Enterprises Ltd.

Type of Application: Permission

Planning Authority Decision: Grant subject to conditions

APPEAL

Type of Appeal: Third Party

Appellant: Paraic O’Rourke

Observers: None

INSPECTOR: Robert Speer

Date of Site Inspection: 10 July, 2007

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 1 of 21

______

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The proposed development site is located in the Ballychristal area of Co. Offaly approximately 2km southeast of the rural village of Geashill. It is situated in a predominantly rural area between a minor county roadway and the R420 regional roadway which extends south-eastwards from Geashill to Clonygowan. The subject site is presently agricultural grassland, generally rectangular in shape following a principle southwest - northeast alignment and has a stated site area of 3.3 hectares. The site will extend in a south-westerly direction from its boundary with the adjacent existing quarry to adjoin the R420. Whilst there is an existing agricultural field gate to the site from the regional roadway it is proposed to access the proposed development solely through the existing access arrangement from the local roadway which serves the existing quarry area and an adjoining machinery yard. The north eastern boundary of the site with the adjoining quarry is defined by a soil berm whilst all remaining boundaries are defined by mature hedgerows. Notably, the topography of the site itself is generally convex in form with the higher elements of the site adjoining the south eastern and north western boundaries.

The adjacent quarry area has a registered site area of 3.688 hectares and it appears that its reserves are nearing exhaustion. This quarry is of an irregular shape and gradually deepens on travelling through same in a south easterly direction. No quarrying or processing activities were being conducted on site during the course of my site inspection and it was observed that a significant quantity of predominantly damaged / scrapped machinery including trucks and processing equipment was being stored on the quarry floor within the south eastern section of the site.

To the immediate northwest of the existing quarry there is a yard area which includes a weigh-bridge and a large shed-like structure used for the maintenance and sales of various machinery. Vehicle repair works appeared to be conducted from within this shed on the day of my site inspection and it was observed that some of the machinery stored on this site could be utilised for quarrying operations.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development consists of the extension of an existing registered quarry (QY 68) into adjoining agricultural lands for the purpose of the extraction of sand and gravel deposits. The proposed extraction area will extend from the south western limit of the extraction area of the existing quarry in a south westerly direction towards the site boundary with the adjoining R420 regional road. The current level of the site varies between c. 84.4 MOD and 89 MOD although the applicant refers to an approximate existing level of 87 MOD. It is proposed to excavate the site to the same level as the existing extraction pit floor of 78 MOD whilst maintaining slopes of 30o to the site boundaries and ensuring a minimum distance of 4m from the boundary hedgerows in order to ensure a secure pit face.

It is anticipated that the life expectancy of the proposed extraction pit is approximately 5 years. It is stated that the extraction rate of the proposed extension will not exceed that of the existing pit area with typically up to 26 truck loads of material removed from the site daily (with a corresponding 26 return trips) equating to

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 2 of 21

______c. 650 tonnes of material daily depending on market demand. The hours of operation are detailed as 07:00-19:00 Monday to Friday and 07:00-14:00 on Saturdays.

Extraction will be undertaken by loading shovel and excavator with aggregates subsequently undergoing processing including crushing and dry screening on site by means of mobile plant located on the pit floor. Graded material will be stockpiled on site prior to transportation for use off site.

On completion of extraction activities all equipment and machinery will be removed from site over a period of 4-6 months. All soil overburden will be replaced onto the land, the site levelled and the pit floor cross-ripped to avoid compaction. Boundary slopes will be reduced to allow the safe movement of agricultural machinery and the overall pit extension returned to agricultural use.

A water supply is available from an existing well on site. Furthermore, whilst the applicant considers that the adjoining machinery yard (which is in the ownership of Ballycrystal enterprises Ltd.) is mostly disassociated with the quarry business the facilities of same, including its offices and toilets, are and will continue to be utilised by employees of the quarry.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

On Site: The Planning Authority has confirmed that there are no planning applications in respect of the subject site or the adjoining existing quarry area and nearby machinery yard.

On Adjacent Sites PA Ref. No. QY68. On 6 December, 2006 the Planning Authority issued its ‘Final Notification’ in respect of the registration of the adjoining quarry under the provisions of Section 261 of the Planning and Development Act, 2000-2006.

PA Ref. No. UD/06/30. On 10 May, 2006 the Planning Authority issued a Warning Letter to Mr. Danny O’Brien of Ballycrystal Enterprises in respect of the unauthorised extension of a sand pit into adjoining agricultural lands.

PLANNING AUTHORITY CONSIDERATIONS AND DECISION

Decision: Following requests for further information and subsequent clarification (with particular reference to the availability of adequate sightlines from the entrance onto the public road) the Planning Authority issued a notification of a decision to grant permission subject to 12 No. conditions summarised as follows:

Condition No. 1 - Requires the proposal to be carried out in accordance with the submitted drawings, save where otherwise modified by subsequent conditions.

Condition No. 2 – The use of the site as a sand and gravel pit, including its restoration providing for the deposition of soil and stones, shall

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 3 of 21

______

cease on or before 5 years from the date of the grant of permission unless otherwise permitted by a subsequent grant of permission. Extraction works shall cease within 4 years of the grant of permission.

Condition No. 3 – No excavation is to be carried out within 4m of any site boundary and slopes shall be no steeper than an angle of 30 degrees to the vertical.

Condition No. 4 – Requires the applicant to submit details of the locations and heights of screening berms along site boundaries, to be accompanied by a landscaping plan, for the Planning Authority’s agreement.

Condition No. 5 – Requires the submission of a restoration statement and management plan for the written approval of the Planning Authority. The site is to be fully restored within one year of the cessation of extraction and fill operations on site.

Condition No. 6 - This specifies various mitigation measure to be utilised by the proposed development in order to preserve the amenities of the area. These include limitations on noise and dust deposition levels in addition to progressive restoration and waste storage / / disposal. It also requires that an environmental monitoring and operations programme be agreed with the Planning Authority.

Condition No. 7 - Hours of operation are restricted to 08:00-18:00hrs Monday to Friday, 08:00-13:00hrs on Saturdays with no operations to be conducted on Sundays and Public Holidays.

Condition No. 8 - No quarry workings, other operations or excavation to occur below the water table across the site.

Condition No. 9 - This condition requires a number of actions in respect of the access arrangements and traffic implications of the proposal as follows:

a) Access to the site to be via the entrance to the existing pit with all other entrances / field gates to be closed. b) A wheel-wash facility to be provided c) I No. public light to be provided at the entrance. d) All internal roads to be completed as per the DoEHLG ‘Specifications for Road Works’ etc. e) Roads construction and design shall conform to the ‘Recommendations for Site Development Works for Housing’ (DoEHLG and NRA specifications. f) All works are to comply with An Foras Forbatha recommendations for site development works.

Condition No. 10 – Requires the removal of 80m of hedgerow to south east of the entrance to site. A new boundary is to be set back a minimum

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 4 of 21

______

of 4m from the roadway edge. Unobstructed sightlines of 90m to be maintained in each direction.

Condition No. 11 – Development contribution (€40,120)

Condition No. 12 – Development bond in respect of securing satisfactory reinstatement of the quarry and provision of road access.

Internal Reports: Roads Design: An initial report dated 2 October, 2006 notes the following:

• The available sight distance at the existing entrance onto the public road is less than 120m in both directions when measured 2.5m back from the near edge of the carriageway. It is recommended that the applicant submit details to achieve a minimum of 120m visibility in each direction. In the event of this necessitating works outside the site evidence permitting these works should be provided. • The access to the site should be via the existing entrance with all other gates etc. closed. • Recommends the submission of details in respect of the proposed access road, a wheel wash, weigh bridge, parking and surface treatment etc.

A second report was prepared following the receipt of amended proposals submitted by the applicant which stated the following:

• The amended details in respect of the available sight distance are adequate. • A wheel-wash facility should be provided and the roadway from same onto the public road surfaced. • A public light is to be installed at the entrance. • All roads / parking areas are to be surfaced in accordance with the DoE ‘Specifications for Road Works’. Parking and circulation requirements are to comply with Development Plan standards. • The access to the site should be via the existing entrance with all other gates etc. closed. • All works are to comply with An Foras Forbatha recommendations for site development works.

Fire Officer: No objection to a grant of permission subject to a possible requirement for a retrospective Fire Safety Certificate for the utility building associated with the proposal.

Water Services: The proposal does not utilise public services and recommends referral to the Environment Section

Environment: Recommends the inclusion of a series of conditions pertaining to mitigation measures relating to matters including dust and noise emissions, surface water run-off, storage of oils, waste etc., restoration and the need for a detailed Environmental Monitoring and Operations Programme

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 5 of 21

______

Area Engineer: Report recommends the removal of 35m of the roadside boundary ditch in order to achieve adequate visibility of 90m in each direction from the proposed entrance.

Prescribed Bodies / Other Consultees (Received): An Taisce: Initial submission requests that the compliance of the existing operations with the DoEHLG Quarry Guidelines should be established as a preliminary matter. A second submission states that the legal status of the existing quarry has not been explained and notes that the combined area of the existing and proposed quarry sites exceeds the 5 hectare threshold for the preparation of an EIS.

Office of Public Works: Correspondence indicates no observations.

Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government: Recommends that due to the scale of the proposed development an Archaeological Impact Assessment should be compiled as further information prior to the formulation of a decision.

Environmental Health Officer (HSE): Correspondence indicates no observations.

Objections / Observations: A series of three submissions were made by the appellant, or by a representative on his behalf, during the assessment of the application by the Planning Authority. The issues raised in same are repeated in detail in his grounds of appeal and relate to:

• The effect of the proposal on the stability of the appellants adjoining lands. • The applicants failure to adhere to conditions imposed on the registration of his existing quarry. • The carrying out of unauthorised quarrying works into the field, of which the proposed development site forms part, in an attempt to establish a precedent for further such activity.

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

In the appeal documentation submitted by Sean Lucy & Associates Ltd., Town Planning Consultants, on behalf of the appellant, a number of ‘anomalies’ are detailed with regard to the status of the existing quarry and machinery yard. These ‘anomalies’ are summarised as follows:

- In the ‘Notification of Intention’ to register the existing quarry dated 12 June, 2006 the Planning Authority stated that it would only ‘register land that is currently being used for quarrying activities’. The Council thus registered an area of 3.688 hectares which included the worked- out area of the quarry in addition to an area of land beyond a hedgerow which never formed part of the extracted area of the existing quarry and was not used as same at the time of registration. Aerial photographs have accompanied this submission which detail that ‘illegal quarrying’ commenced in an adjoining narrow field in May 2006 and that the quarry (as shown in a photograph dated April, 2006) did not extend into this field. Therefore, this quarrying of the narrow field (of which the subject site forms part) is unauthorised

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 6 of 21

______

development. It is suggested that this has been conducted in an attempt to establish a precedent for the continuation of quarrying activities into said field. - The environmental assessment accompanying the application stated that operations on the registered quarry area commenced in the 1990s and no reference is made to any activities carried out prior to 1963. There is no evidence on file to support the pre-1963 status of the quarry and therefore the commercial nature of same would appear to have begun in the 1990s. Since the existing quarry is not permitted by a grant of permission and did not commence prior to 1963 it is therefore unauthorised development and cannot be authorised under the provisions of Section 261 of the Planning and Development Act, 2000. The subject application would consequently facilitate an extension to an unauthorised development. - The area containing the entrance to the site was not included in the Section 261 registration of the quarry. It was only included in the subject application following a request for further information. The appellant is of the opinion that the existing entrance was used for agricultural purposes in the 1980s when the registered quarry was used for tillage and the production of potatoes. The existing shed (also located on unregistered lands) was used for the storage of this crop and for other agricultural purposes. Its use was materially changed by the use of the land for commercial quarrying. It is considered that the unregistered lands to the northwest of the existing quarry constitute unauthorised development, the retention of which was not sought as part of the subject application.

The grounds of appeal of the appellant are summarised as follows:

• The extraction of sand and gravel from this narrow site would have an adverse impact on the stability, amenity and value of the adjoining lands (which are also composed of sand and gravel reserves) for farming purposes and would be injurious to the health and safety of persons utilising these lands and livestock grazing thereon. An engineer’s report has accompanied the submission which considers the proposed 30o slopes to be inadequate to ensure the stability of the adjoining lands. • The site levels provided by the applicant are incorrect when compared to levels surveyed by the appellant and indicate a discrepancy of c. 2m. The applicant has detailed a level of 85MOD on the northern boundaries of the site and 89MOD on the southern boundary. The applicants survey shows the current levels as being at least 91MOD on the southern boundary with a drop of c. 4m to the northern boundary. The depth of excavation to 78MOD would therefore be at least 11m along the northern boundary and at least 13m along the southern boundary (not 9m as suggested by the applicant). • The proposal would have a serious negative visual impact on the surrounding area after the completion of extraction works due to the topography and narrowness of the site and its visibility from the public road (R420). • The proposed restoration works are inadequate and, if completed, will be incongruous and unrelated to the surrounding landscape due to the unsuitable nature of the site for extraction purposes. In view of the applicants history with

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 7 of 21

______

regard to the existing quarry it is considered likely that any conditions pertaining to rehabilitation works will be ignored for a considerable period of time. • The proposal intends to utilise an existing unauthorised entrance to the existing quarry which was not included within the registration boundary. The entrance and machinery yard are located outside the registered operational area of the existing quarry and as such there is no planning permission for a commercial entrance or machinery yard on the site. Condition No. 9(a) of the Planning Authority’s decision requires the proposal to use an unauthorised development and any grant of permission would facilitate same. • The proposal intends to utilise infrastructure on lands located outside the registered area yet within the site boundary. There is no planning permission for the commercial use of this infrastructure and it continued use for the purpose of the proposed development is unauthorised. • The proposed development, by reason of increased HGV movements (at least 52 No. truck movements per day) from an unauthorised commercial entrance onto a substandard road with inadequate sightlines, will interfere with the free- flow of traffic and will endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard. • The proposed development involves a substantial loss of hedgerow which is of important ecological value. The new recessed roadside boundary will unduly upset the physical landscape boundaries associated with this rural area. • The requirement for berming (to be agreed with the Planning Authority) under Condition No. 4 seems impossible to achieve and will impact on the appellants lands. • The proposed development by reason of its restricted width would be unlikely to comply with the noise and dust conditions set out in Condition No. 6 of the Local Authority decision. It is noted that the noise survey was conducted on a day when the existing quarry was not in operation. It is also considered that the restriction of noise levels of 55dB(A) as imposed by Condition No. 6 of the Planning Authority’s decision will be exceeded on measurement from the appellants adjoining lands. • Having regard to the low levels of dust deposition as detailed in the applicants report on dust monitoring it is considered that the existing quarry was inactive at the time of measurement. It is considered that the proposed development will inevitably reach a dust level close to 350mg/m2/day and in view of the narrow width of the site and as 90% of dust particles will be deposited within 50m of the source under normal weather conditions, it is likely that adjoining agricultural lands will be detrimentally affected by dust deposition. • Due to the narrow and linear characteristics of the site it will be extremely difficult to progressively restore worked out areas as required by Condition No. 6 imposed by the Planning Authority. Furthermore, having regard to the shape, form and nature of the site, the restoration works would not enable the land to be returned to an attractive and useful form instead causing scarring of the esker landscape. • This deposit is not of regional or countywide significance and should not be undertaken other than in the context of a proposal for the comprehensive quarrying of the larger gravel deposit of which the site forms a small part. The applicant owns lands surrounding the existing quarry and these may be suitable for quarrying. The restoration of these lands could be achieved without a negative visual impact unlike the appeal site.

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 8 of 21

______

RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF APPEAL

Response of Applicant: The applicants response to the appellants submission includes a number of observations with regard to the background of the appeal site and the application which counter a number of the appellants comments as follows:

- The existing pit on site has been in operation since the 1920s (pre- 1964) and operated by the applicant for over 30 years. Evidence of same was submitted to the Planning Authority to its satisfaction during the Section 261 registration process. - The Ballychristal / Ballydowan pit is small and has been mostly exhausted. Following registration of same it was considered necessary to seek an extension of same to ensure its continued economic viability. - Contrary to the appellants assertion, the applicant does not own other sites more suitable for the extraction of ands and gravel in area. This site was selected for extension due to available infrastructure already in place and its history of extraction. The applicant does not intend to greatly alter the rate of extraction from this pit compared to levels previously experienced at the registered pit. - The adjacent machinery yard is a long standing maintenance and sales yard taken on by the applicant over 30 years ago. Infrastructure on these lands are utilised by the existing quarry and proposed for use by the proposed extension. - The applicant refutes the purported ‘anomalies’ referred to by the appellant with regard to the registration of the quarry under Section 261. This registration process is complete and binding and it is not open for the appellant to invite the Board to ‘go behind’ that completed process.

Response to Grounds of Appeal: • The applicant is confident that the proposed extension is both feasible and economic. It is acknowledged that the extraction of material in an unplanned manner could impact on the stability of neighbouring hedgerows. The site was fully surveyed and buffer zones and 30o slopes were shown for all boundaries. There is an average distance of 4m from any boundary hedgerow with a maximum fall of 9m. These measures are considered to be adequate to secure the stability of all site boundaries and to avoid any noticeable fall of aggregate material. • All the site boundaries are defined by mature hedgerow with fencing on both sides. If there are concerns with regard to the security of these boundaries further fencing can be carried out along the buffer zones. • Should the Board have serious concerns with regard to the proposed slopes, the applicant is amiable to contracting a Chartered Engineer or equivalent as a condition of any permission. • In respect of the visual impact, extraction works will commence from the existing registered pit area and slowly operate towards the R420 boundary. An increased buffer will be retained from the boundary with the R420. Extraction in this way will result in machinery and stockpiles being located on a pit floor

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 9 of 21

______

of up to 9m below the level of the surrounding landscape with soil berms along the buffer zones. The view of the site from the R420 will be seriously impeded by existing mature hedgerow and a soil embankment. • The site will be restored to agricultural use by maintaining the existing hedgerow boundaries and supplementing same as necessary. Soil berms will be levelled after final extraction and the slopes to surrounding fields replanted resulting in a low-lying area blending into the landscape. • It has always been the intention of the applicant to expand operations at this site as operations require a supply of good clean sand and gravel and this pit was their primary source in the local area. • The machinery yard is an established business at this site acquired by the applicant over 30 years ago (rates are payable on this operation). It is not directly associated with the existing quarry except as an ingress / egress area. Following the submission of further information the applicant detailed the entrance and access roadway through these lands and it is proposed to carry out adjustment to the entrance to improve sightlines. The registration process was solely concerned with the location, type and level of activity of existing quarries and as the machinery yard is mostly disassociated from same it was not deemed part of the registered area. • The adjacent machinery yard is owned by the applicant (for over 30 years and is not unauthorised) and employees of the quarry have always utilised the facilities of same. Therefore, it was not considered necessary or practical to seek permission for new offices, toilets etc. • The number and type of HGVs from the proposed extension will not increase beyond previous numbers arising from the registered pit and no complaints have been made by local residents etc. to the applicant. It is proposed to continue to utilise the improved existing access to the local road in the interests of the safety of road users. • The depth of the pit floor (where machinery and equipment will be placed) in conjunction with the provision of soil berms at chosen locations along the buffer zones, will minimise noise and prevent dust levels exceeding the limits as issued by the Planning Authority. It is acknowledged that the requirement to achieve a 55dB(A) at the site boundaries as opposed to the typical noise sensitive receiver is a tight limitation, however, the applicant is committed to achieving same. Previous monitoring at selected noise sensitive receivers to the site did show elevated levels arising from traffic on the R420. These increased on travelling closer to the R420. • The appellants lands are unzoned and are used for agricultural purposes. Notably they share a boundary with the existing registered pit area. The appellants lands are higher than the subject site which will prevent rainwater accessing his fields, whilst the depth of the pit and site boundaries will screen the site from the appellants lands. Therefore, it is unclear as how the proposal will impact on the value or amenity of the appellants property. • The differences in site levels between the applicants and appellants measurements appears to be as a result of the appellant utilising a different benchmark for same. The applicant is satisfied that his levels are correct and notes that no consent was given to the appellant to enter the site. • Low dust levels will be maintained on site through the low pit floor, maintaining low pit floor speeds, soil berms along site boundaries, restricting the removal of soil and overburden to days of favourable weather and to

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 10 of 21

______

reduce wind-aggregate interaction by minimising cleared land. The environmental report prepared on the applicants behalf details further dust mitigation measures whilst the narrow nature of the proposed extension will further reduce wind speeds. • The proposed extension will allow the applicant to supply aggregates locally and will reduce travel distances by HGVs on local roads. The applicant does not own the lands in the immediate surrounds of the proposed extension and cannot therefore make claims to future operations on these lands. The applicant does not have an adequate source of aggregate material, as could be supplied by the proposal, in the Geashill area. Without the proposed extension the continued operation of this pit will not be economical.

Response of the Planning Authority: None.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Offaly County Development Plan, 2003-2009:-

Volume 1: Section 2: Development Strategies and Policies:

Section 25.2: Areas of High Amenity (Location) Maps 4 A-C

Section 2.8: Mining and Quarrying The Council recognises the importance of sand and gravel extractions in the economic life of the County and its importance as a valuable source of employment in parts of the County. It is also recognised however that exploitation of deposits can have a seriously damaging environmental impact on the scientific recreational and amenity value of the County’s natural landscape particularly its Esker network. The suitability of any such enterprise shall be assessed on the basis of the sensitivity of the local environment to such impacts; the scale of the development proposed and the capacity of the road network in the area to accommodate associated traffic.

It shall be the Council’s policy to ensure that extractions which would result in a reduction of the visual amenity of areas of high scenic or recreational amenity (Map No.s 4a, 4b, 4c) or to areas of scientific importance or of geological, botanical, zoological and other natural significance (Map No. 8A) shall not be permitted.

It is Council policy that all such workings should be subjected to landscaping requirements, similar to those for sand and gravel workings and that worked out quarries should be rehabilitated.

The Council shall ensure that all worked out pits and spoil heaps be rehabilitated to suitable land uses. The use of landfilling with waste other than topsoil, subsoil and builders rubble is not considered to be an acceptable method of rehabilitation of pits. To this end bonds or levies will be required by the Council as a condition of any planning permission granted to ensure satisfactory reinstatement on completion of extraction.

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 11 of 21

______

Section 2.10: Eskers The Council recognises the unique importance of Offaly’s Esker landscape deriving from its scientific, botanical, archaeological and historical value. All proposals for sand and gravel extraction at Eskers will be determined by reference to the need to conserve the environment, character and scientific value and the extent to which the proposed development would be damaging to these qualities.

Section 2.10.3: Eskers – Needs of the Building Industry: The Council acknowledges that a satisfactory balance is required between the needs of the building industry and the need to protect the environment. The Council intends undertaking a survey of the Esker sites to identify the following:

i. The extent and location of Esker Ridges. ii. The extent and location of high quality economically valuable reserves of sand and gravel. iii. To establish the conservation value of each of the Esker systems and identify those systems suitable for conservation iv. Identify eskers where there would be least environmental and planning objections to sand and gravel extraction.

Map No. 8A shows the extent of eskers which are considered to be worthy of preservation and where sand and gravel extraction would not be permitted.

Section 2.10.4: Adequacy of Gravel Deposits Offaly County Council acknowledges that serious damage has been done to Eskers in the County. In particular the Esker between Edenderry and Tullamore has almost disappeared. Recent studies have identified the location of existing sand and gravel operations and downstream industries in the County. The Council is satisfied that sufficient deposits are available for the period of the plan, to facilitate the needs of the industry and employment in the County without necessitating any new pits along the Eiscir Riada.

Volume 4: Heritage and Amenity:

Section 1.2.5: Nature Conservation Outside Protected Sites Section 1.3.1: Eskers Section 1.3.3: Sand and Gravel Extraction

1. Sand and Gravel Extraction: All proposals for sand and gravel extraction at eskers will be determined by reference to the need to conserve the environment, character and scientific value, and the extent to which the proposed development would be damaging to these qualities. 2. After Use: As part of the Development Process, the Council will require plans for the after use of former mineral extraction sites, including peat. (Emphasis will be on the creation of wildlife or recreational facilities). 3. Mitigation: In exceptional circumstances where development is allowed which could adversely affect a site of geological importance, conditions will be imposed to minimise disturbance, conserve and manage its geological interest as far as possible and, where damage is unavoidable, provide an acceptable substitute site at the developers’ expense for long term conservation.

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 12 of 21

______

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL POLICY:

The ‘Quarry and Ancillary Activities, Guidelines for Planning Authorities’ published by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in April, 2004 note the economic importance of quarries and the demand for aggregates arising from the needs of the construction industry with particular reference to house building and infrastructure provision. They note that aggregates can only be worked where they occur and that many pits and quarries tend to be located within 25 km of urban areas where most construction takes place.

Chapter 2 identifies appropriate development plan policies and objectives with regard to the development of quarries Chapter 3 identifies the potential environmental issues associated with the development of the extractive industry / quarries and recommends best practice / possible mitigation measures in respect of:

- Noise and vibration - Dust deposition / air quality - Water supplies and groundwater - Natural heritage - Landscape - Traffic impact - Cultural heritage - Waste management

Environmental Management Systems are recommended as a quality assurance system to measure a company’s operations against environmental performance indicators.

Chapter 4 refers to the assessment of planning applications and Environmental Impact Statements. It provides guidance on the information to accompany an application and the inclusion of possible planning conditions. Chapter 5 refers to the implementation of the registration procedures set out in Section 261 of the Act.

Midland Regional Authority: Regional Planning Guidelines, 2004: - Extractive industry should be monitored in line with best practice guidelines issued by the industry. - The importance of the aggregates industry to ensure an adequate supply of aggregates to implement infrastructure under the NDP is acknowledged, as is the requirement to protect this non-renewable resource.

ASSESSMENT

From my reading of the file, inspection of the site and assessment of the relevant local and national policies, I conclude that the key issues raised by the appeal are as follows:

• The requirement, if any, for an EIS

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 13 of 21

______

• The nature and extent, if any, of unauthorised development facilitating the proposed development. • The impact of the proposal on adjoining lands • Visual impact • Ecological impact • Traffic implications

Environmental Impact Assessment: The proposed development comprises a 3.3 hectare extension to an existing registered sand and gravel quarry measuring c. 3.688 hectares (as outlined in a copy of the ‘Final Notification’ to register the quarry as submitted by the Planning Authority). Individually the proposed extension would be sub-threshold, however, when taken in conjunction with the existing quarry it would exceed the 5 hectare threshold as set by Paragraph 2(b) of Part 2 of Schedule 5 of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001, as amended. I note that the existing pit appears to be worked out and that no quarrying activities were being conducted on the day of my site inspection, however, the applicants submission to the Board refers to this pit as ‘mostly exhausted’. This would appear to imply that there are some reserves remaining within the registered quarry area.

Furthermore, Paragraph 13 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 of the Regulations specifies the following class of development as necessitating an Environmental Impact Assessment:

‘Changes, extension, development and testing

a) Any change or extension of development which would:-

i) result in the development being of a class listed in Part 1 or paragraphs 1 to 12 of Part 2 of this Schedule, and ii) result in an increase in size greater than –

- 25 per cent, or - an amount equal to 50 per cent of the appropriate threshold,

whichever is the greater’.

Therefore, having regard to the provisions of Paragraph 13 as outlined above, it is considered that the proposed development is a prescribed form of development which requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement, however, the subject application was not accompanied by an environmental impact statement. Whilst the Board can require the submission of an EIS under the provisions of Article 109(1) of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001, as amended, it is recommended that in the interests of reasonableness the application be assessed as submitted at this stage.

Unauthorised Development: The appellant has raised concerns in respect of the planning status of a number of developments relevant to the subject application including the existing quarry area, the adjoining machinery yard, the entrance / access arrangements and the extension of

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 14 of 21

______quarrying activities into an adjoining field of which the proposed development site forms part. Due to the nature and layout of these various developments I am satisfied that there is an inherent inter-relationship between same and therefore I consider it necessary to review the status of these elements.

The Existing Quarry: Section 1.1 of the Environmental Assessment prepared by Enviroco Management on behalf of the applicant, which accompanied the initial planning application, clearly states that the ‘extraction of sand and gravel commenced on this site in the 1990s’. Notably, and in support of the former comment, the appellant has referred to the registered quarry as being used for tillage and the production of potatoes during the 1980s. Considering the absence of any planning history on site as confirmed by the Planning Authority it would suggest that the existing quarry does not have the benefit of any grant of permission or pre-1964 status and therefore constitutes unauthorised development. In response to the appellants comments the applicant has stated that he has operated the pit / quarry since acquiring it in excess of 30 years ago. He also states that the pit has been in operation since the 1920s and is therefore pre-1964 and that evidence of same was submitted to the Planning Authority during the registration of the quarry in accordance with section 261. The Council are referred to as being satisfied in this regard.

In accordance with the provisions of Section 132 the Planning Authority was requested to submit a complete set of all documentation and drawings etc. pertaining to the registration of the existing quarry. This documentation has been requested solely to verify the pre-1964 status of the existing quarry and it is not intended to assess the registration process itself. The documentation includes a copy of correspondence issued by the Planning Authority which states that ‘The Council, having conducted our own investigation, is satisfied that quarrying activities were taking place on the site before this date [1 October, 1964]’. A further reference is made in documentation on file to staff of Edenderry Town Council confirming the pre-1964 status of the quarry. In its final notification of the registration process the Council notes that extraction commenced before 1 October, 1964.

On the basis of the submitted information, and having regard to the conclusions of the Planning Authority, I am not in a position to dispute the pre-1964 status of the existing quarry / pit of which the proposed development will form an extension.

The Machinery Yard: The applicant has indicated that the existing machinery yard located to the immediate north of the registered quarry is a long standing maintenance and sales yard which was ‘taken on’ by the applicant in excess of 30 years ago. Conversely, the appellant has asserted that the existing shed was used for the storage of potatoes grown on the site of the existing quarry during the 1980s in addition to being used for other agricultural purposes. Consequently, the appellant considers that the use of this shed materially changed on the commencement of commercial quarrying actives on the adjoining lands.

The applicant stresses that the existing machinery yard is generally disassociated from the existing quarry and was not included within those lands registered under Section 261, however, it is noted that as this facility is also retained by the applicant that its

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 15 of 21

______

‘infrastructure’ i.e. sanitary services etc. are utilised by employees of both the shed and the quarry operations. The applicant has stated that rates are payable on this machinery yard and that it does not constitute unauthorised development.

In accordance with the provisions of Section 132 the Planning Authority was requested to submit complete details of any planning history pertaining to the existing machinery yard and its associated structures including the shed, septic tank system, weigh bridge etc. The Planning Authority has responded by stating that there is no planning history in respect of the shed and machinery yard and that it appears to have existed for ‘a long number of years’. An aerial photograph dated 1995 has been supplied which purports to show the shed at that time.

The absence of any grant of planning permission in respect of the machinery yard operation would indicate that in order for same to be considered as authorised it must pre-date 1 October, 1964. There is insufficient evidence on file to categorically state whether or not the existing machinery yard operation pre-dates 1964 and thereby I am unable to definitively ascertain its planning status. I would, however, note that the applicant stresses that the use of the shed is generally disassociated from the existing quarry area and that it does not form part of the registered area of same. Furthermore, the shed itself and the surrounding parking area etc. are not included within the confines of the proposed development site as outlined in red.

The Existing Entrance / Access Arrangement: Following a request for further information the applicant submitted an amended site layout plan on 4 January, 2007 which extended the site area as outlined in red to include the access arrangement from the public road extending through the adjoining machinery yard and quarry area to serve the proposed development. The appellant has asserted that the existing entrance onto the public road is located outside the registered operational area of the existing quarry and as such there is no planning permission for a commercial entrance on the site. It is further stated that the grant of permission as issued by the Planning Authority effectively facilities this unauthorised entrance.

Whilst there is no record of any grant of permission having been issued in respect of the existing entrance onto the public road I would refer the Board to the fact that the Planning Authority have accepted that the existing quarry pre-dates 1964. I would consider it to be a reasonable extension of this summation to conclude that the quarry was served by an entrance from the public road which would also pre-date 1964.

The Extension of Quarrying Activities: The appellant has asserted that the Planning Authority’s ‘Notification of Intention’ to register the existing quarry dated 12 June, 2006 stated it would only ‘register land that is currently being used for quarrying activities’. The Council thus registered an area of 3.688 hectares which included the worked-out area of the quarry in addition to an area of land beyond a hedgerow which is alleged by the appellant to have never formed part of the extracted area of the existing quarry and was not used as such at the time of registration. Aerial photographs have accompanied this submission which detail that ‘illegal quarrying’ commenced in an adjoining narrow field c. May 2006 and that the ‘original’ quarry (as shown in a photograph dated April, 2006) did not extend into this field. Consequently, the appellant considers this quarrying of the

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 16 of 21

______narrow field (of which the subject site forms part) to be unauthorised development and that it may have been conducted in an attempt to establish a precedent for the continuation of quarrying activities into said field.

I note that the applicant has not responded directly to this allegation of an unauthorised extension of quarrying activities and instead considers that the registration process is now complete and that it is not open to the appellant to invite the Board to ‘go behind’ that completed process. The applicant is correct in that the purpose of this appeal is not to review the procedures or determination in respect of the registration of the existing quarry, however, I am of the opinion that as the area of quarrying activity which is under dispute is located immediately between the proposed extraction area and the existing quarry, and as the proposal will form an extension of same, that a review of its status is an appropriate consideration.

Whilst the area in dispute has been included within that area registered under section 261, section 5.10 of the ‘Quarries and Ancillary Activities, Guidelines for Planning Authorities’ states the following:

‘It should be noted that the registration of quarries under section 261 does not confer planning consent for a quarry that is an unauthorised development. Therefore, an unauthorised development remains unauthorised even after registering with the planning authority’.

Therefore, whether or not this disputed area is registered is irrelevant in the determination of its planning status.

Both the aerial photographs submitted by the appellant and that received from the Planning Authority dated 1995 indicate that the ‘original’ quarry did not extend into the adjoining field (of which the subject site forms part of) until c. May, 2006. Indeed, following a site inspection by the Planning Authority a Warning Letter was served on the applicant informing him that it had come to its attention that unauthorised development was being carried out comprising an unauthorised extension of a sand pit into adjoining agricultural lands (It would appear that no further action was taken by the Planning Authority).

During my site inspection no quarrying activities were being conducted on site, however, it was clear that some extraction works had been conducted in an area of a field located between the ‘original’ quarry and the proposed extraction area. This comprised the stripping of topsoil / overburden to form a berm between the northern and southern boundaries of the field. Some extraction of aggregates was subsequently carried out although, as stated above, this appears to have ceased. There is no record of any grant of planning permission permitting this extension of the quarry area and I am not of the opinion that it formed part of the original quarry and therefore does not have the benefit of pre-1964 status. On considering the information presented I am of the opinion that this extension of quarrying activity constitutes unauthorised development. Such a conclusion has significant implications for the proposed development as submitted. The subject application is for permission only for an extension to a (registered) quarry. The proposed new area of extraction is separated from the original pre-1964 quarry by an intervening extension of unauthorised quarrying activity. Therefore, the proposed development would constitute an

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 17 of 21

______extension of unauthorised development and thus I am of the opinion that the Board is precluded from considering a grant of permission in this instance.

Impact on Adjoining Lands: Stability: Concerns have been raised in respect of the potential impact of the proposed excavation and extraction works on the structural stability of the adjoining lands to the immediate north and south of the subject site (and consequently the health and safety of persons and livestock thereon). The submitted sectional and survey drawings prepared on behalf of the applicant indicate that it is proposed to excavate the subject site to a depth of 78MOD (equivalent to the level of the existing pit floor) which will reduce the ground level of the site in the region of 8-10m. It is proposed to retain a buffer of c. 4m between the extraction area and the northern and southern boundaries whilst a buffer of 5m will be retained from the R420. The applicant has indicated that slopes of 300 over a fall of 9m will be provided (resulting in a pit floor c. 40m wide) and that this is sufficient to ensure the stability of the adjoining lands. Conversely, the appellant has submitted correspondence from a chartered engineer which states that slopes no steeper than 450 from the horizontal should be imposed.

It is considered that this matter could be resolved, in the event of a grant of permission, by way of a condition requiring the submission of certification / proof from a geotechnical engineer that the proposed slopes will be stable and will not cause land sliding that could affect adjoining properties / roads. If the slopes were to prove unstable, the applicant should indicate how it would be proposed to rectify this.

Noise: Having reviewed the results of the noise survey conducted by the applicant I would concur with the appellant in that it appears to be reasonable to conclude that the existing quarry was not operational during the course of this monitoring. No reference is made to any noise which could be directly associated with extraction or processing activities on site such as from excavators or screening plant. The noise levels both within and adjoining the existing quarry and subject site were generally below 55 Laeq with the only exception at a location adjacent to the R420. The highest noise levels were recorded adjacent to two dwelling houses alongside the R420 and it is suggested that the raised noise levels encountered at these locations resulted from passing traffic on the R420.

I would be of the opinion that in view of the mature screening along the site boundaries, the background noise levels and the potential for sound attenuation provided by the depth of the excavation, noise levels at the nearest noise sensitive receivers could be mitigated to within acceptable levels.

Dust: It is probable that during the course of the dust monitoring conducted by the applicant that the existing quarry was not operational, however, I would be of the opinion that the mature site boundaries, taken in conjunction with dust mitigation measures including the erection of soil berms, the installation of a wheel wash and dust suppression procedures, would be adequate to avoid dust deposition detrimentally impacting on surrounding properties.

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 18 of 21

______

Considering the aforementioned issues, the utilisation of appropriate mitigation measures and boundary treatment combined with a programme of environmental monitoring will avoid impacting on the amenity or value of adjoining lands.

Visual Impact: Having regard to the provisions of Map No. 8(3) of the Development Plan, the proposed development site is located within a landscape classified as Class 3 (Low Sensitivity), however, it is in close proximity to a number of identified eskers as detailed on Map Nos. 8(3) and 8(A). The location of these eskers would appear to correspond with an ‘Area of High Amenity’ as identified on Map No. 4(C). I note that the registration of the existing quarry referred to it being partially located within an area of high amenity i.e. an esker (to the immediate south east). It is of relevance to note that those lands in the ownership of the applicant to the north west and south east of the existing quarry / machinery yard extend into identified Areas of High Amenity / Eskers unlike the subject site.

The subject site is presently undulating agricultural grassland bounded by mature hedgerow along its northern, southern and western boundaries with the eastern boundary defined by a soil berm. It is generally rectangular although it is somewhat convex in shape with the lands to the immediate north and south rising moderately over the site. The site is presently only immediately visible from the existing quarry and the R420 regional road which adjoins its south western boundary (Notably, the views from this roadway are not listed for protection in the Development Plan). The roadside boundary is defined by a mature hedgerow with a raised soul embankment along the south western portion of the site frontage.

The site will be excavated from its present ground level to a depth of c. 78 MOD to correspond to the level of the pit floor in the adjoining quarry (Whilst the different levels indicated by the parties to the appeal are noted the existing pit floor is an appropriate benchmark to review the depth of proposed excavation relative to adjoining lands). The consequence of this depth of excavation is that the pit floor will be c. 7m below the level of the public road thus screening it from same. Having regard to the depth of the excavation, the absence of any on site designations, the available screening on approaching the site from the north and south along the regional road and the nature of the surrounding landscape, I am satisfied that through the provision of appropriate mitigation measures such as the erection of soil berms between the extraction area and the public road that the visual impact of the proposal will be within acceptable limits.

The applicant has indicated that the site will have a lifetime of c. 5 years with site reinstatement consisting of soil overburden being replaced onto the land, the site levelled and slopes reduced to return the land to agricultural use. Site restoration can be satisfactorily addressed by way of condition in the event of a grant of permission.

Ecological Impact: It is stated elsewhere in this report that the subject site is not subject to any statutory designation although it is in proximity to an esker system identified as an area of high amenity in the Development Plan. The removal of the roadside boundary hedgerow is not desirable although it would be necessitated in the interests of traffic safety.

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 19 of 21

______

Traffic Implications: It is stated that the extraction rate from the proposed development will be maintained at a similar level to that previously generated by the existing quarry i.e. equating to the removal of up to c. 650 tonnes of aggregate from the site per day totalling c. 52. No. truck movements to and from the site daily (over a lifetime of c. 5 years). The site will be accessed via an existing entrance extending from the L-01013 local road through the machinery yard and existing quarry area. On travelling north west from the existing entrance along the local road it discharges onto the R420 regional road between Geashill and Clonygowan permitting direct access to the towns of Tullamore and Portarlington. Whilst there is an existing field gate from the site onto the regional roadway it is proposed that all traffic frequenting the site will access same from the local road. The existing local county roadway has a carriageway width of c. 5m, is generally of a reasonable condition and is considered to have adequate capacity to accommodate the expected traffic movements and volumes associated with the proposal.

The available sightlines from the existing entrance onto the county road are considered to be deficient with particular reference to those in a north westerly direction on exiting the site. Following requests by the Planning Authority the applicant submitted an amended site layout plan which details proposals to recess the roadside boundary to purportedly achieve sightlines of 120m in each direction measured from a point located 2.4m back from the near edge of the roadway. I consider improvement works to the entrance to be necessary in the interests of traffic safety and whilst this will involve works outside of the proposed development site I note that they would be on lands within the applicants control.

CONCLUSION:

Notwithstanding the registration of the existing quarry area and the various mitigation measures proposed, I am of the opinion that unauthorised quarrying activities have taken place on site. These unauthorised works completely separate the proposed extraction area from the original pre-1964 quarry and thus the proposed development would form an extension of this unauthorised development.

Furthermore, I would draw the Board’s attention to the absence of an Environmental Impact Statement in respect of the subject application and the requirements of Paragraph 13 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001, as amended.

RECOMMENDATION

Having regard to the foregoing I recommend that permission be refused for the proposed development for the reasons and considerations set out below:

Reasons and Considerations:

1. On the basis of the submissions made in connection with the planning application and appeal, the Board is not satisfied that the existing extension of quarrying activities into the field of which the subject site forms part, which separates the proposed development from the

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 20 of 21

______

original quarry area, is authorised by a grant of planning permission. Accordingly, the Board is precluded from considering a grant of planning permission for an extension to an unauthorised development.

Signed: ______Date: ______Robert Speer Inspectorate

PL19. 222320 An Bord Pleanala Page 21 of 21