Planning Committee Agenda Item No. 4 (b)

24 April 2018

Waste Planning Application (County Matter)

Application No: WSCC/009/18/SR

Proposed variation of Conditions 2 (cessation), 3 (approved plans) and 27 (HGV numbers) of Planning Permission WSCC/104/13/SR

Washington Sand Pit, Hampers Lane, Sullington, West , RH20 4AF

Report by Head of Planning Services

Local Member: Paul Marshall District:

Executive Summary

This report concerns a proposal in relation to quarrying and restoration at Washington Sand Pit near to vary Conditions 2 (cessation), 3 (approved plans), and 27 (HGV numbers) of planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR.

Planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR allowed an additional 84,000 tonnes of sand to be extracted and exported by road over a two-year period, and changes to previously-approved restoration that would take place over a five-year period. Restoration involved the importation of 477,000 tonnes of inert waste material by road, concurrent with the sand extraction over the first two years. Restoration of the sandpit would see the site put to a beneficial after-use as part of Sandgate Country Park with a focus on heathland restoration/creation, together with recreation and amenity uses in the south-eastern corner.

The current application proposes that sand extraction takes place until 31 December 2019, rather than 1 May 2017 under the current permission, with minor revisions to the phasing plans. No change is proposed to the amount of inert waste to be imported or to the end date for restoration, that is, 1 May 2020. The applicant also proposes that current permitted limits on HGV are amended to allow increased movements so that extraction and restoration can take place concurrently; this change would allow a maximum of 90 movements per day Monday to Friday (45 in and 45 out), rather than 54 movements (27 in and 27 out), and a maximum of 40 movements (20 in and 20 out) on Saturdays, rather than 26 movements (13 in and 3 out).

This report provides a generalised description of the site, sets out the planning history, and describes the proposal and the policy context within which it should be considered.

Most statutory consultees have either no comments or raise no objection subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions. However, Council require HGV numbers to remain the same and raise concerns about unacceptable impacts on the amenity of neighbouring residents, principally through dust and debris spillage on to the public highways. Storrington & Sullington Parish Council only object to the removal of Condition 27(b) as it would allow an increase in the number of HGVs until

May 2020. Washington Parish Council raise concerns about mud and debris being deposited by HGVs.

Sixteen representations have been received from local residents, including the Millford Grange Residents Committee (78 residents). The objections include the following issues: no justification for extending the sand extraction period; conflicts with NPPF; adverse impacts on highway safety and capacity; adverse emissions from on-site operations; and HGVs causing unacceptable impacts on through noise impact and on air quality.

Consideration of Key Issues The main material planning considerations are whether the proposal: • meets an identified need; • has an acceptable impact on the landscape; • is acceptable with regard to highway capacity and road safety; and • has an acceptable impact on local amenity and the local environment.

Identified Need

It is considered that there is a demonstrable need for the development as it would allow for economically-important soft sand resources on site to continue to be extracted, rather than sterilised, and it would allow inert waste to be imported to provide for beneficial recreational after-uses in accordance with the approved restoration scheme.

Impact on the Landscape and Visual Amenity

The application site is situated just outside the boundary of the South Downs National Park and within a semi-rural area designated as the Sandgate Country Park. The site is well-screened by vegetation around its perimeter, and much of the operations would take place with limited visible impact. Impacts caused during changes to extraction operations and an increase in HGV movements would not be significant. The proposed development, when restored, would still result in an acceptable landform with benefits to the wider landscape and to the public, contributing positively to the Sandgate Country Park designation. Existing mature planting adjoining the sandpit would be retained and protected.

Highway Capacity and Road Safety

The proposed development would result in a maximum of 90 HGV movements each weekday and 40 HGV movements on Saturdays until 1 May 2020 rather than the currently permitted 54 and 26 HGV movements on weekday and Saturdays respectively. However, the site is located on an A-road (the A283), some 600m from the A24 which forms part of the strategic lorry route network. The Highway Authority and Public Rights of Way Team have considered the potential impacts and concluded that, subject to conditions and the legal protection afforded to the public bridleway, the proposed development would not have a significant impact and as such accords with the National Planning Policy Framework. Therefore, the proposed development is considered acceptable with regards to highway capacity and road safety.

Impact on Local Amenity and the Local Environment

The site is in close proximity to a number of dwellings and shares its access with a bridleway. However, the use of the latter would not change over the existing use, and the proposed amendments would still deliver the long-term benefits for recreational users once the site is restored. Further, despite the nature of works involved in mineral extraction and restoration with imported inert waste materials, including through associated traffic movements, the imposition of conditions (to control hours of operation, HGV numbers, noise impacts and impacts on air quality) as well as an HGV routeing agreement should ensure that there are no unacceptable impacts upon amenity and the local environment. On completion of the proposed restoration, additional footpaths and public access as well as designated recreational areas would be provided that connect with the rest of Sandgate Country Park and the wider rights of way network.

Conclusion

The proposed continued extraction of soft sand to 31 December 2019 would contribute to the continued need and supply of this economically important resource and avoid sterilisation of a viable mineral reserve. No change is proposed to the amount of inert waste to be imported to restore the site by 1 May 2020. Restoration would provide public access and greater recreational opportunities as part of the Sandgate Country Park. The proposed concurrent extraction and importation operations, and proposed increase in HGV movements, could have an adverse impact on the area. However, it is considered that impacts on highway capacity and road safety and on local amenity and the local environment would be acceptable as they can be controlled by updated conditions and an updated legal agreement. Overall, it is considered that the proposal accords with the relevant development plan policies relating to the extraction of land-won minerals and the restoration of minerals sites with inert waste, as well as other material considerations including national policy.

Recommendation

That planning permission be granted subject to: (a) the conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of this report; and (b) the completion of an updated Section 106 Agreement concerning: (i) the routeing of HGVs to and from the application site; and (ii) the securing of all proposed permissive footpaths and public car parking area. (iii) the rescinding of all previously permitted sand extraction rights held by the applicant at the application site.

1. Introduction

1.1 This report concerns a planning application in relation to quarrying and restoration at Washington Sand Pit near Storrington). Planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR allowed an additional 84,000 tonnes of sand to be extracted and exported by road over a two-year period, and changes to previously- approved restoration that would take place over a five-year period. Restoration involves the importation of 477,000 tonnes of inert waste material by road, concurrent with the sand extraction for the first two years. Restoration of the sandpit would see the site put to a beneficial after-use as part of Sandgate

Country Park with a focus on heathland restoration/creation, together with recreation and amenity uses in the south-eastern corner.

1.3 The current application proposes to vary conditions to allow sand extraction to take place until 31 December 2019, rather than 1 May 2017, with minor revisions to phasing plans. No change is proposed to the end date for restoration, that is, 1 May 2020. The applicant also proposes that current permitted limits on HGV are amended to allow an increase in movements so that extraction and restoration can take place concurrently.

2. Site Description

2.1 The application site, known as Washington Sand Pit, is situated within the Parish of Storrington and Sullington in Horsham District (see Appendix 2 - Site Location Plan). The proposed development site is an active sandpit that has been partially restored and comprises approximately 6.5 hectares of land (see Appendix 3 - Application Site Boundary Plan).

2.2 The village centre of Storrington is situated approximately 2km to the west of the site, with the residential area known as situated approximately 500m to the north-east. The site is situated immediately north of the A283 and immediately west of Hampers Lane, beyond which is an existing dwelling and a large residential development known as Milford Grange. To the west is the active Sandgate Park Quarry sandpit and to the north is a recreation ground, beyond which are dwellings.

2.3 Land to the west and east of the application site is, and has been, used for mineral extraction since the middle of the last century. Directly adjoining the application site’s western boundary is the active Sandgate Park sandpit. Beyond this site, and immediately west of Water Lane, is the former Angel’s Sandpit which has been redeveloped into housing.

2.4 The site is accessed from its south-eastern corner via a surfaced access road from Hampers Lane, at its junction with the A283. Hampers Lane is a private road and public bridleway. Traffic entering and exiting the sandpit only uses around a 10m section at the southern end of Hampers Lane.

2.5 A number of residential properties are situated in close proximity to the Sand Pit. The nearest residential dwellings to the application site are Cadrona on Hampers Lane, situated approximately 12m to the east, and Chanctonbury Lodge, situated approximately 13m to the south. Immediately beyond Hampers Lane and Cadrona, to the east, is the Milford Grange residential development, some 50m away. Within the Heath Common residential area, the nearest dwelling to the site is approximately 170m to the north. Other residential dwellings are situated either side of the A283 between 30 and 90m away to the south and south-west.

2.6 To the south of the A283 is the South Downs National Park.

3. Planning History

3.1 Sand extraction has taken place at the application site for over 60 years. Various planning permissions have been granted that consolidate consents and include extensions to increase the sandpit’s life and restoration deadlines.

3.2 On 1 May 2015, planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR was granted for “The continuation of mineral extraction for a two year period and the importation of inert material over a five year period only, to enable the restoration of mineral working at Washington Sandpit for the long term benefit of the Sandgate Country Park”.

3.3 The permission allowed continued mineral extraction for a period of two years (approximately 84,000 tonnes of sand), and the importation of 477,000 tonnes of inert waste over five years (concurrent with extraction for the first two). The applicant commenced development on 1 May 2015, so extraction was permitted to take place to 1 May 2017 (see Appendix 4 - Approved Phasing Plan) with restoration required by 1 May 2020 (see Appendix 5 - Approved Restoration Scheme).

3.4 Restoration will provide additional recreational opportunities in accordance with Horsham District Council Sandgate Country Park allocation.

3.5 The grant of permission was subject to the completion of a section 106 agreement that secured the following: (i) the routeing of HGVs to and from the application site; (ii) the securing of all proposed permissive footpaths and public car parking area; and (iii) the rescinding of all previously permitted sand extraction rights held by the applicant at the application site.

3.6 In July 2017, County Council officers observed that sand extraction and restoration operations at the site were no longer being undertaken in accordance with the approved phasing and restoration plans.

3.7 Following discussions with officers, extraction of sand has ceased at the site so that the unauthorised activities can be regularised through the variations to the planning permission that are currently proposed.

3.8 Although no extraction is taking place, stockpiled sand is being exported from the site and inert materials imported to the site for restoration.

4. The Proposal

4.1 The applicant is seeking planning permission to amend condition 2 (cessation), 3 (approved plans), and 27 (HGV numbers) of planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR.

4.2 Condition 2 would be amended as follows: “The development hereby permitted, including the importation of restoration materials by road, shall cease and the land be restored in full (in accordance with Condition 124 of this permission) not later than five years from the commencement of the development hereby permitted 1 May 2020. All sand extraction operations shall cease by 31 December 2019.”

4.3 The effect of this change would be to confirm the end date of operations as 1 May 2020, five years from the commencement of the 2013 permission, and to

enable sand extraction to take place until 31 December 2019, rather than 1 May 2017 under the current permission.

4.4 No change is proposed by the applicant to the amount of inert waste to be imported or to end date for restoration.

4.5 Condition 3 would be amended as follows, to take account of the need for a new phasing plan that takes account of the proposed concurrent extraction and infill, and reflects the current situation on site:

“The development hereby permitted shall not take place other than in accordance with the approved plans and schemes, which shall be implemented throughout the course of the development hereby approved: Drawing No. 002 ‘Planning Boundary’ (dated October 2013), Drawing No. WP L/15 B ‘Restoration Scheme’ (dated 14/05/2014) Drawing No. WP L/12A/06B ‘Final Restoration’ (dated June 2016), Drawing No. WP L16 ‘Phasing Plan’ (dated 14/05/2014 Drawing Nos. LP1-LP6 ‘Phases 1A, 1, 2A, 2, 3A, 3 ‘Extraction and Filling’ (dated April 2018) and Drawing No. WP L/19 Rev 1 ‘Isopachytes Between Base of Extraction and Restoration’ (dated July 2014), Drawing No. WP L/12A/07A ‘Sections’ (dated December 2017), Drawing No. 16/019/100 Rev C ‘Topographical Survey as at November 2017’ (dated November 2017), Noise Management Plan Rev 1 (SLR Ref: 416.01258.00004, dated September 2015), Particulate Management and Action Plan (SLR Ref. 416.01258.00004 Version No: 2, November 2015), Vehicle Cleaning Scheme (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0004, June 2015), Surface Water Drainage Scheme (SLR Ref. 416.01258.00004 Version No. 1, October 2015), Hydrogeological Risk Assessment (Frith Consultants, Report fc37126, July 2015), Extraction and Restoration Method Statement (‘Submission of Details for the Discharge of Condition 11’: SLR Ref. 416.01258.00004, November 2015), Proposed Warning Signage and Road Markings Rev. 1 (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0002, August 2015); and Revised Landscape Restoration and Management Plan Rev. B (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0004, June 2016), save as varied by the conditions hereafter.”

4.6 Permission is also sought to amend Condition 27 to allow an increase in HGV numbers so that extraction and restoration can take place concurrently, and to provide clarity. It would be reworded as follows: “(a) During years 1 and 2 following commencement, nNo more than 45 HGVs shall enter or, and no more than 45 HGVs shall exit the site between the hours of 08.00 -18.00 on Monday to Friday inclusive; and No more than 20 HGVs shall enter and no more than 20 HGVs shall or exit the site between the hours of 08.00-13.00 on Saturdays. (b) During years 3, 4 and 5 following commencement, no more than 27 HGVs shall enter or exit the site between the hours of 08.00-18.00 on Monday to Friday inclusive; and No more than 13 HGVs shall enter or exit the site between the hours of 08.00-13.00 on Saturdays. No HGVs shall enter or exit the site on Sundays, Bank Holidays or Public Holidays throughout the five year period.”

4.7 The applicant’s proposed change would allow a maximum of 90 movements each day on Monday to Friday (45 in and 45 out), rather than 54 movements (27 in

and 27 out) as currently permitted, and a maximum of 40 movements (20 in and 20 out) on Saturdays, rather than the permitted 26 movements (13 in and 3 out).

5. Environmental Impact Assessment

5.1 The proposal falls within Part 2(a), being a ‘Quarry’, and Part 11(b), being an ‘Installation for the disposal of waste’, of Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2017. Part 13(b) of Schedule 2 notes that EIA is required for development that, as changed or extended, may have significant adverse effects on the environment.

5.2 In August 2017, the applicant submitted a request for a Screening Opinion to ascertain whether or not the proposed changes to planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR would be EIA development and require an Environmental Statement (ES) to accompany any submitted planning application.

5.4 For quarries, ‘National Planning Practice Guidance: Environmental Impact Assessment’ (revised 28 July 2017) states that EIA is more likely to be required for ‘all development except the construction of buildings or other ancillary structures where the new floorspace does not exceed 1,000 square metres’. For waste installations, it states that EIA is more likely to be required where the annual throughput of waste (household, commercial, and/or industrial) is more than 50,000 tonnes or the site area is more than 10 hectares. However, sites taking smaller quantities of these wastes, sites seeking only to accept inert wastes (demolition rubble etc.) or Civic Amenity sites, are unlikely to require Environmental Impact Assessment.

5.5 Taking into account the changes proposed to planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR, the extent of work already undertaken, the characteristics and location of the proposed development, the context of the approved land-use, controls in place through the planning and Environmental Permitting regulations, and the criteria in Schedule 3 of the EIA Regulations, it was considered that the proposed development was unlikely to give rise to environmental impacts of a scale sufficient to be considered ‘EIA development’. Therefore, an ES was not required to be submitted with the current planning application.

6. Policy

Statutory Development Plan

6.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that applications are determined in accordance with the statutory development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise (as confirmed in paragraph 2 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)).

6.2 For the purposes of the application, the following documents form the statutory development plan: the Horsham District Planning Framework (2015), the Waste Local Plan (2014), and the West Sussex Minerals Local Plan (2003) (saved policies only).

6.3 The key policies in the development plan, which are material to the determination of the application, are summarised below, and their conformity or otherwise with the National Planning Policy Framework considered. In addition,

reference is made to relevant national planning policy guidance and other policies that guide the decision-making process and which are material to the determination of the application.

Horsham District Planning Framework (2015)

6.4 The Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF) was adopted in November 2015 and the policies should be given significant weight.

6.5 The relevant policies are: 1 (Sustainable Development), 3 (Development Hierarchy), 7 (Economic Growth), 9 (Employment Development), 10 (Rural Economic Growth), 11 (Tourism and Cultural Facilities), 24 (Environmental Protection), 25 (Natural Environment and Landscape Character), 26 (Countryside Protection), 30 (Protected Landscapes), 32 (Quality of New Development), 33 (Development Principles), 39 (Infrastructure Provision), 40 (Sustainable Transport) and 43 (Community Facilities, Leisure and Recreation).

West Sussex Waste Local Plan (2014)

6.6 The Waste Local Plan (WLP) was adopted by the County Council on 11 April 2014. It covers the period to 2031 and is the most up-to-date statement of the authorities’ land-use planning policy for waste. It accords with the approach taken in the NPPF and should be given significant weight when considering this application.

6.7 Policy W8 of the WLP relates to recovery operations involving the deposition of inert waste to land. Proposed waste development must meet the following: (a) the proposal results in clear benefits for the site and, where possible, the wider area; (b) the material to be used is only residual waste following recycling and/or recovery or it is a waste that cannot be recycled or treated; (c) there is a genuine need to use the waste material as a substitute for a non- waste material that would otherwise have to be used; (d) the material to be reused is suitable for its intended use; (e) the amount of waste material to be used is no more than is necessary to deliver the benefits identified under (a); (f) there would be no unacceptable impact on natural resources and other environmental constraints; (g) the proposal accords with Policy W13 (Protected Landscapes); (h) any important mineral reserves would not be sterilised; and (i) restoration of the site to a high quality standard would take place in accordance with Policy W20.

6.8 Policies W11–W20 relate to development management and are designed to ensure that there would be no unacceptable harm to amenity, character, and the environment or to other material considerations from waste development proposals. Of particular relevance to the proposals are: Character (Policy W11), High Quality Development (Policy W12), Biodiversity and Geodiversity (Policy W14), Air, Soil and Water (Policy W16), Flooding (Policy W17), Transport (Policy

W18), Public Health and Amenity (Policy W19), Cumulative Impact (Policy W21) and Aviation (Policy W22).

6.9 Policy W21 relates to cumulative impact and seeks to ensure that an unreasonable level of disturbance to the environment and/or local communities will not result from waste management and other sites operating simultaneously and/or successively.

West Sussex Minerals Local Plan (2003) (Saved Polices (2007))

6.10 The West Sussex Minerals Local Plan (2003) contains a number of policies that are relevant to this application. Although the Plan is ‘out-of-date’, the approach taken to sand extraction accords with the NPPF and, therefore, it should be given significant weight when considering this application.

6.11 Policy 1 supports (working practices which cause the least environmental harm), the incorporation of opportunities to conserve and enhance the environment, and appropriate afteruse. Policy 2 seeks to ensure that development does not prevent or hinder mineral extraction, where that mineral is or is likely to become economically important.

6.12 Polices 7 and 8 seek to ensure that temporary recycling operations cause the least environmental harm through working practices, including lorry routeing. Policies 13, 16-17, 19-20 and 22 all seek to protect the local environment and local residential and other amenity; and require appropriate and practicable reclamation to be completed as early as possible

6.13 Policies 29 and 33 seek to ensure that any planning permission for sand extraction must either meet a defined need and/or ensure that sterilisation of a mineral resource is avoided as a result. Policies 47 and 48 notes that account will be taken of the numbers, type and routeing of vehicles likely to be generated in relation to a minerals proposal, and that permission will be reused if the highway network is inadequate and any significant harm cannot be overcome. Policy 48 requires an appropriate access to the site is provided. Policy 49 assesses the cumulative effect of minerals workings on the locality.

6.14 Policies 52-53, 55-56 and 58-63 requires details of the siting and appearance of buildings, plant and machinery and their removal when no longer required. Policy 53 requires adequate measures for the protection of hedgerows, trees and shrubs, and the provision of bunds and planting where required to screen workings. Policy 55 requires the protection and promotion of Public Rights of Way and Policy 56 seeks to ensure that the quality of surface and groundwater is protected and that mineral extraction will not adversely affect the water table, cause significant environmental damage, flooding or adversely affect water resources.

6.15 Policy 58 seeks to ensure that any soils stripped are handled appropriately and stored ready for use in restoration, where necessary. Policy 59 seeks to control the drainage and discharge of water within the site. Policies 60 and 61 notes that conditions will be imposed requiring that acceptable maximum levels of noise are not exceeded and that dusts generated are suppressed. Policy 62 requires control over artificial lighting and Policy 63 requires conditions controlling hours of work.

West Sussex Joint Minerals Local Plan with Proposed Modifications) January 2018)(‘JMLP’)

6.16 Proposed Modifications to the JMLP were approved in December 2017. In accordance with paragraph 216 of the NPPF, it can be given significant weight given its advanced stage of preparation, although the relevant policies may be given less weight where there are unresolved objections. The following sets out the relevant considerations and the weight accorded to them in the determination of this application.

6.17 Policy M2 of the JMLP is of greatest relevance to the present application as it relates to ‘the winning of soft sand’, including extensions of time to existing sites ‘that contribute to ensuring a steady and adequate supply is maintained’. Whilst this Policy is proposed to be significantly rewritten, to ensure is it justified and consistent with National Policy, its requirements would remain the same. At this time, it should be given ‘proportionate weight’ for development management purposes.

6.18 The more generic ‘development management’ policies of relevance to the proposal are as follows: • Policy M12: Character – supports development which would not have an unacceptable impact on the separate identity of towns and villages and reinforce the main attributes of the wider character areas; [policy subject to minor objection and so can be given substantial weight] • Policy M13: Protected Landscape – supports development outside protected landscapes provided they do not undermine the objectives of the designation [policy subject to minor objection and so can be given substantial weight] • Policy M15: Air and Soil – supports development which would not have unacceptable impacts on the intrinsic quality of air and soil or their management; [policy not subject to objection and so can be given significant weight] • Policy M16: Water Resources – supports development which would not cause unacceptable risk to water quality or quantity; [policy subject to some relatively minor challenge and so can be given significant weight] • Policy M17: Biodiversity and Geodiversity – supports development which avoids/mitigates/remedies significant harm to wildlife species and habitats; [policy subject to significant challenge and so little weight should be afforded] • Policy M18: Public Health and Amenity – supports development which would not result in an unacceptable impact on public health and amenity through on site operations or vehicle movements; and which safeguards public right of way routes; [policy subject to some challenge and so less weight afforded]. • Policy M19: Flood Risk Management – supports development which would not result in increased flood risk on site or elsewhere; [not challenged and so should be afforded significant weight] • Policy M20: Transport – supports development with adequate transport links; maximises the use of the Lorry Route Network rather than local roads; does not have an unacceptable impact on highway capacity; provides safe access

to the highway; provides vehicle turning on site; and minimises vehicle movements; [not challenged and so should be afforded significant weight] • Policy M22: Cumulative Impact – supports development provided an unreasonable level of disturbance does not result from cumulative impact; [policy subject to challenge and so little weight should be afforded]. • Policy M23: Design and Operations of Mineral Developments – sets out considerations for scale, form and layout of mineral operations [only minor challenges / changes proposed so significant weight should be afforded]. • Policy M24: Restoration and Aftercare – supports development with restoration schemes which ensure that land is restored at its earliest opportunity to a high quality. [not challenged and so should be afforded significant weight]. • Policy M25: Community Engagement - supports site liaison groups, where necessary, to address issues arising from site operations [policy not subject to objection and so can be given significant weight]

National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

6.19 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Government’s planning policies for and outlines how these are expected to be applied. The NPPF does not form part of the development plan but is a material consideration in determining planning applications. One of its stated intentions is to guide decision-makers as to what matters are material to the decision-making process.

6.20 Paragraph 142 sets out the importance of minerals to support sustainable economic growth, highlighting that minerals can only be worked where they are found, and the importance of making best use of them to secure their long-term conservation.

6.21 The other paragraphs in the NPPF of greatest relevance to the present proposal are: Paragraph 14 (presumption in favour of sustainable development, and approving development that accords with the development plan); 17 (core planning principles); 103 (ensuring flood risk is not increased elsewhere); 109 (contribute to and enhancing the natural environment), 120 (ensuring new development appropriate for location taking into account impact of pollution on health and the environment); 123 (impact of noise health and quality of life); 144 (consideration of mineral planning application); 186 (positive decision making); 196 (determining applications in accordance with the development plan); 197 (presumption in favour of sustainable development); and 203-206 (use of planning conditions).

Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)

6.22 The PPG sets out the Government’s planning guidance to be read in conjunction with the NPPF. It does not form part of the development plan but is a material consideration in determining planning applications.

PPG: Minerals (March 2014)

6.23 Paragraph 12 sets out the relationship between planning and other regulatory regimes noting that “the planning system controls development and the use of land in the public interest” including ensuring development is appropriate for its location and an acceptable use of land.

6.24 Crucially, it notes that “the focus of the planning system should be on whether the development itself is an acceptable use of the land and the impacts of those uses, rather than any control processes, health and safety issues or emissions themselves where these are subject to approval under regimes. Mineral planning authorities should assume that these non-planning regimes will operate effectively.”

6.25 Paragraph 13 sets out the environmental issues minerals planning authorities should address including noise, air quality, lighting, visual impact, traffic, risk of contamination to land, geological structure, flood risk, impacts on protected landscapes, surface and in some cases ground water issues, and water abstraction.

6.26 Paragraph 17 notes that the cumulative impact of mineral development can be a material consideration in determining planning applications.

PPG: Waste (October 2015)

6.27 Paragraph 5 notes that local planning authorities can ensure that human health and the environment are protected through the appropriate handling of waste, in considering individual planning applications against the criteria in Appendix B of the National Planning Policy for Waste (2014),

6.28 Paragraph 6 notes the obligation to consider the principles of self-sufficiency and proximity in relation to waste management. Paragraph 9 notes that driving waste up the waste hierarchy, away from disposal such as landfill, is an integral part of national policy for waste and a material consideration in decisions on waste applications.

6.29 Paragraphs 50 and 51 note that the planning system often needs to work with other regulatory regimes. With waste planning matters, waste planning authorities usually work with the Environment Agency and the Environmental Permitting regime, which they implement and regulate.

PPG: Air Quality (March 2014)

6.30 Paragraph 5 notes that air quality may be relevant to a planning application when it would significantly affect traffic, introduce new point sources of air pollution, expose people to existing sources of air pollution, give rise to potentially unacceptable impact during construction, or affect biodiversity.

6.31 Paragraph 9 considers how air quality and its impacts fit into development management process.

PPG: Health and Wellbeing (updated July 2017)

6.32 Paragraph 2 notes that the link between planning and health is long established. It encourages local planning authorities to engage with relevant organisations when carrying out their planning function. The assessment of potential pollution and other environmental hazards, which could adversely impact on human health, should be included in considering new development.

6.33 Paragraph 3 notes that the first point of contact on population health and well- being issues should be the Director of Public Health, who in turn liaises with Public Health England. Paragraph 4 notes that local authority planners should consider consulting the Director of Public Health on any planning applications (including at the pre-application stage) that are likely to have a significant impact on the health and wellbeing of the local population or particular groups within it. This would allow them to work together on any necessary mitigation measures.

PPG: Natural Environment (January 2016)

6.34 Paragraph 1 notes that planning should recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, while paragraph 4 notes that planning decisions should be based on up-to-date information about the natural environment and characteristics of the area. Paragraph 7 notes the statutory duty to have regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity, while paragraph 17 seeks to include biodiversity enhancement in and around development, including improved links between existing sites.

National Planning Policy for Waste (2014)

6.35 This national policy guidance document promotes, wherever possible, the use of waste as a resource and the movement of waste management up the ‘waste hierarchy’, thereby only supporting the disposal of waste as a last resort. It also sets out the approach waste authorities should take to determining applications.

6.36 At paragraph 7 it notes “When determining waste planning application, waste planning authorities should….consider the likely impact on the local environment and on amenity against the criteria set out in Appendix B and the locational implications of any advice on health from the relevant health bodies. Waste planning authorities should avoid carrying out their own detailed health assessment of epidemiological and other health studies.”

6.37 At paragraph 7 it also notes “When determining waste planning application, waste planning authorities should….ensure that waste management facilities are well-designed, so they contribute positively to the character and quality of the area in which they are located.”

6.38 Appendix B sets out key criteria for testing the suitability of waste management sites, in particular; protection of water resources, land instability, landscape and visual impacts, nature conservation, conserving the historic environment, traffic and access, air emissions including dust, odours, vermin and birds, noise, light and vibration, litter, and potential land use conflict.

EU Council Directive 2008/98/EC

6.39 By virtue of the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 when determining any application for planning permission that relates to waste management (regulation 18) the planning authority is required to take into account EU Council Directive 2008/98/EC which sets out the objectives of the protection of human health and the environment (article 13) and self-sufficiency and proximity (first paragraph of article 16(1), article 16(2) and (3)). Case law has confirmed that these articles are objectives at which to aim. As objectives they must be kept in mind whilst assessing the application and provided this is done, any decision in which the furtherance of the objectives are not achieved, may stand.

7. Consultations

7.1 Horsham District Council (Planning and Environmental Health): Requires HGV numbers to remain the same and raises concerns about unacceptable impacts on the amenity of neighbouring residents, principally through dust and debris spillage on to the public highway. Better controls should be imposed if permission is granted.

7.2 Storrington and Sullington Parish Council: Objection to the amendment to Condition 27 as it would allow an unlimited number of HGVs to visit the site until May 2020. If permission is granted, a more effective wheel washing system is needed.

7.3 Washington Parish Council: No objection in principle although concerns were raised over mud and debris being deposited on the A283 by HGVs exiting the sandpit.

7.4 Environment Agency: No comments.

7.5 South Downs National Park Authority: No comments.

7.6 Natural England: No comments.

7.7 Health and Safety Executive: Approved restrictions on southerly extraction limits should be retained.

7.8 WSCC Drainage: Approved surface water drainage schemes should be retained.

7.9 WSCC Ecology: No strategic ecological objection.

7.10 WSCC Highways: No objection subject to maximum daily HGV numbers being controlled by condition.

7.11 WSCC Landscape Architect: No objection as restoration would be achieved by the same date and changes only affect phasing.

7.12 WSCC Public Rights of Way: No objection.

7.13 WSCC County Councillor: Supports the local objections and concerns about the retention of higher permitted HGV numbers beyond 2017 until May 2020, and associated impacts on the locality from this, and that mud/debris was being

deposited on the local road network, principally the Hampers Lane junction with the A283 and the A283 itself.

8. Representations

8.1 The application was publicised in accordance with Schedule 3 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. In response to neighbour notification letters, the erection of six site notices at the front of the site and throughout the local area, and advertisements being placed in the local paper, sixteen representations have been received from local residents, including the Milford Grange Residents Committee (78 residents).

8.3 The main issues raised in representations are: • No justification for extending sand extraction period; • Conflicts with NPPF; • 45 HGVs each weekday rather than 27 and spillage of mud and debris poses adverse impacts to both highway safety (particularly around Hampers Lane and the A283 junction) and on local amenity; • Adverse impacts of emissions on the environment through operational and traffic noise and on air quality; and • Noise generation (plant & HGVs) increased beyond existing levels and would cause unacceptable harm to local residents despite mitigation proposed.

9. Consideration of Key Issues

9.1 The main material planning considerations are whether the proposal: • meets an identified need; • has an acceptable impact on the landscape; • is acceptable with regard to highway capacity and road safety; and • has an acceptable impact on recreational and local amenity and the local environment.

Need for the Development

9.2 The principle of the use of the site for sand extraction and restoration, through infill with inert waste, by May 2020 has already been established through the granting of planning in 2015 (WSCC/104/13/SR). The current application seeks to allow extraction to continue to 31 December 2019. The proposed volume, depth and extent of sand to be extracted would be no greater than that currently permitted under WSCC/104/13/SR (i.e. 84,000 tonnes originally of which 25,000 tonnes remains).

9.3 The applicant notes that the extension of time for extraction would ensure that no sand reserves would remain in situ and be sterilised when the site is restored.

9.4 The contribution of sand extraction to the overall supply of sand in the County remains an important consideration. The need for land-won sand (and gravel) within West Sussex is established through the JMLP (2018) and the NPPF (2012). Paragraph 142 of the NPPF (2012) also highlights that minerals can only be worked where they are found.

9.5 Table 1 below sets out the current permitted soft sand reserve in West Sussex and the predicted annual requirement based on the previous ten years’ sales. This gives the overall shortfall in soft sand to be met over the JMLP period to 2033.

Table 1: Soft Sand in West Sussex 2018-2033 Tonnes (millions)* Permitted Reserve (i.e. sites with planning 3.458 permissions) Annual Requirement (taking account of 0.412 relevant local information) Requirement 2018-2033 (i.e. 16 years) 6.592 Shortfall 3.140

* Based on data at end December 2016

9.6 Therefore, the continued extraction of sand until 31 December 2019 would contribute to the continued need and supply of the economically important soft sand resource and avoid sterilisation of a viable mineral reserve.

9.7 No changes are proposed to the volume and type of restoration material to be imported than that currently permitted under WSCC/104/13/SR (i.e. 477,000 tonnes of inert waste originally of which 360,000 tonnes remains) and there is a continuing requirement to restore the site to a beneficial after-use as part of Sandgate Country Park.

9.8 It is considered that there is a demonstrable need for the development as it would allow for economically-important soft sand resources on site to continue to be extracted, rather than sterilised, and it would allow inert waste to be imported to provide for beneficial recreational after-uses, as permitted under the approved restoration scheme.

Impact upon the Landscape and Visual Amenity

9.9 The proposed amendments result in visual impact through extending the time over which extraction operations would take place, primarily through additional HGV movements, though there would also be changes to the phasing of the restoration approved under WSCC/104/13/SR.

9.10 The proposed development site is a permitted sandpit that is situated within a semi-rural location to the north of the South Downs National Park. It is within an area designated as the Sandgate Country Park. Therefore, the development has the potential to affect sensitive landscape features.

9.11 The proposal for 90 HGVs movements each weekday until 1 May 2020, rather than it decreasing to 54 movements has the potential to affect both the rural locality and sensitive landscape features, particularly the South Downs National Park.

9.12 However, HGVs would be directed to/from the A24 to the east, minimising contact with the National Park designation. There would be an increase of 36

movements each weekday, which is not considered significant in terms of the local landscape, particularly given the site’s location on the A283.

9.13 As the pit is restored, views of the western area of the site would be possible from a number of properties to the north/north-west and from within the adjacent Sandgate Park site. These works, despite being delayed, would still be temporary and not significantly different to those approved under planning permission WSCC/104/13/SR.

9.14 The application site would remain well-screened by mature woodland and vegetation which would be retained, with only limited views into the site available, mainly from the north and west. A small number of houses to the north have limited views of the sandpit but would not initially have views of the working area as the previous extraction of sand has left a deep depression in the landscape. Views into the site would increase as grounds levels rise during infill, and extraction works would be extended. However, these views would not create visual impacts that would be significantly different to those previously- assessed. The WSCC Landscape Architect raises no concerns in this regard.

9.15 Proposed planting and appropriate land management as well as water features and recreational features are still considered to enhance the future landscape and ecological benefits of the site within the Sandgate Country Park.

9.16 The WSCC Landscape Architect accepts the changes to the phasing of the approved restoration works proposed as being high quality and practicable in terms of its management of restoration and aftercare, and maximising benefits, thereby being of benefit to the wider landscape.

9.17 The application site is situated just outside the boundary of the South Downs National Park and within a semi-rural area designated as the Sandgate Country Park. The site is well-screened by vegetation around its perimeter, and much of the operations would take place with limited visible impact. Impacts caused during changes to extraction operations and an increase in HGV movements would not be significant. The proposed development, when restored, would still result in an acceptable landform with benefits to the wider landscape and to the public, contributing positively to the Sandgate Country Park designation. Existing mature planting adjoining the sandpit would be retained and protected.

Highway Capacity and Road Safety

9.18 The material difference in highways terms between the development permitted under WSCC/104/13/SR and this proposal is that the applicant is seeking to continue to allow 90 HGV movements each weekday (45 in and 45 out) and 40 movements on Saturdays (20 in and 20 out) until 1 May 2020.

9.19 The applicant should presently be working within Year 3 of the five year development approved under WSCC/104/13/SR and the HGV movements should have reduced to 54 movements (27 in and 27 out) on weekdays and 26 movements (13 in and 13 out) on Saturdays.

9.20 The current proposal would result in an additional 36 HGV movements each weekday and an additional 14 HGV movements on Saturdays to 1 May 2020.

9.21 Concerns about highway capacity and safety (specifically conflict with users of the bridleway and mud/debris being deposited on the A283) have been raised as a result of the impact of HGV traffic, particularly in combination with existing traffic from the Heath Common residential area to the north, the adjoining Milford Grange housing development to the east and existing traffic on the A283.

9.22 WSCC Highways have raised no concerns in relation to either highway capacity or road safety, subject to the continued imposition of HGV movement controls. Notwithstanding this, existing conditions requiring on-site HGV wheel washing (to prevent mud/debris leaving the site), warning signage and road markings (for HGV drivers joining Hampers Lane) and HGV loads being covered (to prevent debris spillage) would all be retained should permission be granted.

9.23 Although the County Council’s Public Rights of Way Team has not raised an objection, Hampers Lane is a public bridleway (BW2627) and its use is legally protected. Bridleway priority would be ensured through appropriate signage and surfacing being required by condition at the site’s access gate to warn HGV drivers exiting onto Hampers Lane.

9.24 The proposed development would result in a maximum of 90 HGV movements each weekday and 40 HGV movements on Saturdays until 1 May 2020 rather than the currently permitted 54 HGV movements on weekdays, and 26 HGV movements on Saturdays. However, the site is located on an A-road (the A283), some 600m from the A24 which forms part of the strategic lorry route network. The Highway Authority and Public Rights of Way Team have considered the potential impacts and concluded that, subject to conditions and the legal protection afforded to the public bridleway, the proposed development would not have a significant impact and as such accords with the National Planning Policy Framework. Therefore, the proposed development is considered acceptable with regards to highway capacity and road safety.

Impact on Local Amenity and the Local Environment

9.25 Public Rights of Way: As previously noted, Hampers Lane is a public bridleway (BW2627) which runs north-south along the sandpit’s eastern boundary. The application would propose to continue the use of this path, as has previously been the case, with priority given to Public Rights of Way (PROW) users. The continued use has the potential to result in impacts on PROW users.

9.26 However, whilst the proposed development would result in HGV movements not decreasing as currently required, the impact of this is not considered unacceptable, subject to control by condition and legal agreement.

9.27 Further, on completion of the proposed restoration works, the new landform and its proposed permissive footpath network would provide connections with the existing public footpath network and the proposed network on the adjoining Sandgate Park sandpit, within the Sandgate Country Park allocation and the locality. This would provide public access, including a car parking area and the potential for a camp site, and recreational areas that link with those surrounding the application site.

9.28 Noise: The proposal would result in ongoing cumulative noise impact from both extraction and restoration works, where under the extant permission, extraction and the associated HGV movements would have ceased. As previously noted the

nearest dwellings to the site are within 12 metres, so there is potential for impacts on residential amenity through noise emissions, both in the nature of the works and in terms of timescale needed to complete the proposed development.

9.29 The hours of operation of 08.00-18.00 Monday to Friday and 08:00-13:00 on Saturdays (as per the existing sandpit) would remain unchanged. These hours, including HGV arrivals and departures, have been considered and accepted by Horsham District Council’s Environmental Health Officer (EHO), provided that they are again controlled by condition.

9.30 The higher number of HGV movements (90 per weekday) resulting from the proposed development are considered by the EHO to be acceptable, especially when considered in the context of the existing vehicular traffic noise on the adjoining A283.

9.31 Details of plant, equipment, machinery to be used during the proposed development and their locations with mitigation including the use of acoustic barriers remain unchanged. These have been considered and accepted by Horsham District Council’s Environmental Health Officer (EHO), provided that they are again controlled by condition.

9.32 Air Quality: Mineral extraction and restoration with imported inert waste materials has the potential to cause adverse impacts on local air quality, including through associated traffic movements.

9.33 Whilst the EHO accepts that the applicant’s proposed mitigation for the suppression of dust during both mineral extraction and restoration works would be sufficient to ensure impacts are contained within the site, concerns are raised over mud and debris being deposited on the A283 by associated HGVs. These are shared by both Parish Councils, local residents, and the local County Councillor.

9.34 Since commencement in 2015, several complaints have been made relating to mud and debris being deposited on the A283 by the applicant’s HGVs, though not all have been substantiated. No complaints relating to air quality from on- site operations or materials deposited on the local road network have been received by the County Council.

9.35 The site does have an active wheel washing facility and also has the use of a road sweeper. Both have been viewed by officers when visiting site and appear in full working order. When contacted over complaints, the applicant has investigated promptly and carried out road sweeping to ensure their haul road, the southern end of Hampers Lane and sections of the A283 to the east are all free from debris.

9.36 WSCC Highways have not received any direct complaints themselves and do not raise any concerns from a highways legislation perspective. Although there is sand and other debris on and adjacent to the A283 in close proximity to the application site and the adjoining active Sandgate Park quarry, all attempts to mitigate this impact are being undertaken and are considered acceptable. The EHO approved the existing conditioned Dust Management Scheme, which would be retained should permission be granted.

9.37 The village of Storrington, situated approximately 2km to the west of the proposed development is also accessed by the A283. Due to the impact of traffic emissions, this village remains designated as an Air Quality Management Area. To avoid further impacts on air quality from developmental traffic, all HGVs will continue to be directed to and from the east of the application site and away from Storrington. The applicant has agreed to this and the legal agreement between the County Council, the applicant and any other interested parties, approved under WSCC/104/13/SR will need to be updated and agreed before planning permission could be granted.

9.38 The site is in close proximity to a number of dwellings and shares its access with a bridleway. However, the use of the latter would not change over the existing use, and the proposed amendments would still deliver the long-term benefits for recreational users once the site is restored. Further, despite the nature of works involved in mineral extraction and restoration with imported inert waste materials, including through associated traffic movements, the imposition of conditions (to control hours of operation, HGV numbers, noise impacts and impacts on air quality) as well as an HGV routeing agreement should ensure that there are no unacceptable impacts upon amenity and the local environment. On completion of the proposed restoration, additional footpaths and public access as well as designated recreational areas would be provided that connect with the rest of Sandgate Country Park and the wider rights of way network.

10. Overall Conclusion and Recommendation

10.1 The proposed continued extraction of soft sand to 31 December 2019 would contribute to the continued need and supply of this economically important resource and avoid sterilisation of a viable mineral reserve. No change is proposed to the amount of inert waste to be imported to restore the site by 1 May 2020. Restoration would provide public access and greater recreational opportunities as part of the Sandgate Country Park.

10.2 The proposed concurrent extraction and importation operations, and proposed increase in HGV movements, could have an adverse impact on the area. However, it is considered that impacts on highway capacity and road safety and on local amenity and the local environment would be acceptable as they can be controlled by updated conditions and an updated legal agreement.

10.3 Overall, it is considered that the proposal accords with the relevant development plan policies relating to the extraction of land-won minerals and the restoration of minerals sites with inert waste, as well as other material considerations including national policy.

10.4 It is recommended, therefore, that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of this report and the completion of an updated Section 106 Agreement concerning the routeing of HGVs to and from the application site, the securing of all proposed permissive footpaths and public car parking area, and the rescinding of all previously permitted sand extraction rights held by the applicant at the application site.

11. Resource Implications and Value for Money

11.1 This is not a material planning consideration and cannot, therefore, be considered in determining this application. There will be no requirement for

additional resources unless the decision is challenged and there is a requirement to defend the County Council’s position at any subsequent appeal.

12. Equality Duty

12.1 The County Council has a duty to have regard to the impact of any proposal on those people with characteristics protected by the Equality Act 2010. Officers considered the information provided by the applicant, together with the responses from consultees and other parties, and determined that the proposal would have no material impact on individuals or identifiable groups with protected characteristics. Accordingly, no changes to the proposal were required to make it acceptable in this regard.

13. Risk Management Implications

13.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 provides that the determination of planning applications must be made in accordance with the policies of the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. If this is not done, any decision could be susceptible to an application for Judicial Review.

14. Crime and Disorder Act Implications

14.1 This decision has no implications in relation to crime and disorder.

15. Human Rights Act Implications

15.1 The Human Rights Act requires the County Council to take into account the rights of the public under the European Convention on Human Rights and prevents the Council from acting in a manner which is incompatible with those rights. Article 8 of the Convention provides that there shall be respect for an individual’s private life and home save for that interference which is in accordance with the law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of (inter alia) public safety and the economic wellbeing of the country. Article 1 of protocol 1 provides that an individual’s peaceful enjoyment of their property shall not be interfered with save as is necessary in the public interest.

15.2 For an interference with these rights to be justifiable the interference (and the means employed) needs to be proportionate to the aims sought to be realised. The main body of this report identifies the extent to which there is any identifiable interference with these rights. The Planning Considerations identified are also relevant in deciding whether any interference is proportionate. Case law has been decided which indicates that certain development does interfere with an individual’s rights under Human Rights legislation. This application has been considered in the light of statute and case law and the interference is not considered to be disproportionate.

15.3 The Committee should also be aware of Article 6, the focus of which (for the purpose of this committee) is the determination of an individual’s civil rights and obligations. Article 6 provides that in the determination of these rights, an individual is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal. Article 6 has been subject to a great deal of case law. It has been decided that for planning matters the decision making

process as a whole, which includes the right of review by the High Court, complied with Article 6.

Michael Elkington Head of Planning Services

Background Papers As set out in Section 6.

List of Appendices Appendix 1 - Conditions and Informatives Appendix 2 - Site Location Plan Appendix 3 - Application Site Boundary Plan Appendix 4 - Approved Phasing Plan Appendix 5 - Approved Restoration Scheme

Contact: Sam Dumbrell (0330) 222 6947.

Appendix 1 - Conditions and Informatives

GENERAL

Cessation 1. The development hereby permitted, including the importation of restoration materials by road, shall cease and the land be restored in full (in accordance with Condition 4 of this permission) not later than 1 May 2020. All sand extraction operations shall cease by 31 December 2019.

Reason: To comply with Schedule 5 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Approved Plans and Schemes 2. The development hereby permitted shall not take place other than in accordance with the approved plans and schemes, which shall be implemented throughout the course of the development hereby approved: Drawing No. 002 ‘Planning Boundary’ (dated October 2013), Drawing No. WP L/12A/06B ‘Final Restoration’ (dated June 2016), Drawing Nos. LP1-LP6 ‘Phases 1A, 1, 2A, 2, 3A, 3 ‘Extraction and Filling’ (dated April 2018), Drawing No. WP L/12A/07A ‘Sections’ (dated December 2017), Drawing No. 16/019/100 Rev C ‘Topographical Survey as at November 2017’ (dated November 2017), Noise Management Plan Rev 1 (SLR Ref: 416.01258.00004, dated September 2015), Particulate Management and Action Plan (SLR Ref. 416.01258.00004 Version No: 2, November 2015), Vehicle Cleaning Scheme (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0004, June 2015), Surface Water Drainage Scheme (SLR Ref. 416.01258.00004 Version No. 1, October 2015), Hydrogeological Risk Assessment (Frith Consultants, Report fc37126, July 2015), Extraction and Restoration Method Statement (‘Submission of Details for the Discharge of Condition 11’: SLR Ref. 416.01258.00004, November 2015), Proposed Warning Signage and Road Markings Rev. 1 (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0002, August 2015); and Revised Landscape Restoration and Management Plan Rev. B (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0004, June 2016), save as varied by the conditions hereafter.

Reason: To secure a satisfactory development and to accord with paragraphs 103, 109, 120 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) to protect the amenities of the local population and the local environment.

Availability of Approved Documents 3. A copy of the decision notice together with the approved plans and schemes and any subsequently approved documents shall be kept at the site office at all times and the terms and contents of them shall be made known to the supervising staff on site. These documents shall be made available to the County Planning Authority upon request.

Reason: To ensure that the site operatives are conversant with the terms of the planning permission.

TIME-RELATED CONDITIONS

Restoration and Aftercare Scheme 4. Not later than 1 June 2018, an updated Working and Restoration Plan (further to that approved under Condition 3’s Revised Landscape Restoration and Management Plan Rev. B (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0004, June 2016) shall be

submitted in writing to the County Planning Authority for approval. The approved scheme shall include but not be limited to the following measures: (a) the location and proposed heights of stockpiles of extracted sand and imported waste materials for each year; (b) the levels of the site on completion of the excavation works, grading and soil re-spreading shown on a plan (1:1250 to 1:2500 in scale) for each year; (c) the schedules of seeding and planting, including the species and spacing of any plants and habitats, and their management (in accordance with Policy AL19 of the Horsham District Site Specific Allocations of Land (2007) and the Land Use Consultants Sandgate Country Park Study (2010), for a period of 10 years following the completion of restoration (on 01 May 2020); (d) the details with plans of aftercare showing the steps to be taken, with timescales, for each phase of the site’s progressive restoration to be restored to a standard suitable for sustaining the seeding and planting for amenity and conservation purposes in (e), for a period of 10 years following the completion of restoration (on 01 May 2020); (e) the measures to be taken to integrate and incorporate the restoration and aftercare works with neighbouring sites within the wider Sandgate Country Park, for a period of 10 years following the completion of restoration on (01 May 2020); (f) the measures to be taken to incorporate features of ecological interest into the restoration and how such features would be managed in the long term, for a period of 10 years following the completion of restoration on (01 May 2020); and (g) the measures to be taken to provide areas for recreational benefit and public and vehicular access and how these would be integrated within the wider Sandgate Country Park area and the existing public right of way, public transport and public highway networks, for a period of 10 years following the completion of restoration (on 01 May 2020), subject to ongoing review and to the satisfaction of the County Planning Authority.

Thereafter, the updated approved working and restoration plan shall be implemented in full and within the agreed timetable throughout the operations within the development hereby permitted.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109 and 120 of the NPPF (2012) to ensure that the quarry is quarry is worked and restored in appropriate timescales in the interests of the general amenities of the locality.

Haul Road and Hampers Lane Junction - Left Hand Arrow 5. Within one month of the grant of planning permission, the approved left hand arrow (2m long and 1m wide) approved under Condition 3’s Proposed Warning Signage and Road Markings Rev. 1 (SLR Ref. 416.01258.0002, August 2015) shall be reinstated at the junction of the site’s haul road and Hampers Lane. The arrow shall be maintained and highly visible throughout the course of the development hereby approved until the completion of the approved restoration works (on 01 May 2020).

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and of the amenities of the locality.

Haul Road and Hampers Lane Junction - Markings 6. Within one month of the grant of planning permission, details of painted road markings clearly delineating the junction of the site’s haul road and Hampers Lane, including a timetable for the works, shall be submitted in writing to the County Planning Authority for written approval. Once approved, the markings shall be installed and maintained in a highly visible condition throughout the course of the development hereby approved until the completion of the approved restoration works (on 01 May 2020).

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and of the amenities of the locality.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

HGV Access 7. The means of all HGV access to and from the site shall be via the existing site access to and from A283 only as indicated on approved plan Drawing No. 002 ‘Planning Boundary’ (dated October 2013).

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and of the amenities of the locality.

Works Restriction in Former Landfilled Area of Site 8. Notwithstanding the provisions of Conditions 4 and 10, no work including tree planting likely to cause a disturbance of the landfilled materials previously deposited in the south-east corner of the site (and described in sections 1.2.1 and 2.6.4 (a) of the ARC report submitted to the County Planning Authority on 6 October 1993) in support of planning permission SG/37/93 (granted 5 July 1994)) shall be carried out unless the details of the proposed works have been submitted to and approved in advance and in writing by the County Planning Authority. Any work in this area shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120, 122 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) to avoid pollution through contamination of soil and controlled waters.

Removal of Buildings, Plant, Equipment and Machinery 9. All buildings, plant, equipment and machinery required on site in pursuance of sand extraction operations shall be dismantled or demolished and removed from the site and the site thereof restored in accordance with the scheme of restoration approved under Condition 4 within six months of the permanent cessation of sand extraction.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

Southerly Working Limit 10. No extraction of sand or disturbance of the land surface other than for the execution of any approved restoration measures required by Conditions 4 and 8 shall be undertaken within a distance of 15 metres of the southern boundary of the site adjacent to the A283.

Reason: To secure the stability of the A283 road and provide a landscaped screening margin to the site in the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the locality.

Sand Extraction Depth 11. No sand shall be extracted below a depth of 30 metres A.O.D.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120, 122 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) so as to avoid pollution through contamination of the soil and controlled waters and to secure a satisfactory development.

Noise - Reversing Alarms 12. All vehicles as well as all plant and machinery that are used on site and those under the applicant’s control moving to and from the site that are required to emit reversing warning noise, shall use white noise alarms as opposed to single tone ‘bleeping’ alarms throughout the operation of the development hereby permitted.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) to protect the amenities of the local population and the local environment.

Permitted Restoration Materials 13. Imported and any on-site materials required for the purposes of the development hereby permitted shall constitute only inert and uncontaminated waste materials.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, and 120-123 of the NPPF (2012) to avoid pollution through contamination of the soil, water and/or air and to ensure the restoration of the site within agreed timescales in the interests of the general amenities of the locality.

Controlling Processing of Permitted Materials 14. Only processing of only inert and uncontaminated waste materials shall take place on site at any time throughout the duration of the development hereby permitted. No waste materials shall be exported off site, save for rejected waste materials that are unsuitable for restoration. A record of reject loads shall be maintained by the applicant at all times and be kept at the site office at all times. They shall be made available to the County Planning Authority upon request.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109 and 120-123 of the NPPF (2012) to ensure the restoration of the site within agreed timescales in the interests of the general amenities of the locality.

No Crushing Operations 15. No mechanical crushing of inert and uncontaminated waste materials shall take place at any time on site.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120, 122 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) to ensure the restoration of the site within agreed timescales in the interests of the general amenities of the locality.

Submission of Topographical Surveys 16. Not later than 30 June 2018, a detailed topographical survey, providing an update on the approved extraction and restoration works shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority.

Following this, detailed topographical surveys, providing an update on the approved extraction and restoration works, shall be submitted every six months to the County Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the extraction and restoration of the site is completed to an acceptable standard within agreed timescales and in the interests of the general amenities of the locality.

External Lighting 17. No external lighting shall be installed anywhere within the site. This exclusion shall not prohibit the use of lighting on plant, equipment, machinery and vehicles required during the permitted hours of working or the installation of sensor- controlled security lighting, which shall be designed and shielded at all times to minimise light spillage beyond the site boundary.

Reason: To accord with paragraph 125 of the NPPF (2012) to prevent light pollution in the interests of the amenity of the locality and of local residents.

Hours of Use 18. There shall be no sand extraction or restoration operations, including waste handling and processing, associated with the development hereby permitted, which shall include the use of plant, equipment, machinery and vehicles, outside the hours of: • 08.00 and 18.00 on Monday to Friday inclusive; and • 08.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays.

No sand extraction or restoration operations, including waste handling and processing operations, which shall include the use of plant, equipment, machinery and vehicles, shall take place on Sundays, Bank Holidays or Public Holidays.

Testing and/or maintenance of plant, equipment, machinery and/or vehicles required within the development hereby permitted shall only be carried out between the hours of 09:00 and 17:00 on Monday to Friday (excluding where those days are designated as either Bank or Public Holidays) inclusive.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) in the interests of the amenity of the locality and of local residents.

HGV Numbers 19.No more than 45 HGVs shall enter the site and no more than 45 HGVs shall exit the site between the hours of 08.00-18.00 on Monday to Friday inclusive.

No more than 20 HGVs shall enter the site and no more than 20 HGVs shall exit the site between the hours of 08.00-13.00 on Saturdays.

No HGVs shall enter or exit the site on Sundays, Bank Holidays or Public Holidays.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) in the interests of the amenity of the locality and of local residents.

Enclosed Loads 20. All vehicles exporting material from the site and delivering wastes to the site shall have their loads enclosed within the vehicle or container so as to prevent

spillage or loss of materials on to the public highway and the release of emissions to air.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) in the interests of highway safety and of the amenities of the locality.

Vehicular Operations and Controls 21. The site shall not be used as an operating base for any Heavy Goods Vehicles, or the repair and/or maintenance of any Heavy Goods Vehicles and plant, equipment and/or machinery which are not under the direct control of the operator and not normally used for the delivery, handling or sorting of minerals to or within the site.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109, 120 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) in the interests of road safety and of the general amenities of the locality.

Record Keeping (including Sand and Materials tonnages) 22. From the grant of planning permission, a record of the annual quantities of extracted sand exported from the site (in total 25,000 tonnes) and restoration materials imported to the site (in total 360,000 tonnes) and the consequent numbers of goods vehicle movements generated in any one year shall continue to be maintained by the applicant at all times and made available to the County Planning Authority upon request.

Reason: To accord with paragraphs 109 and 123 of the NPPF (2012) to enable the County Planning Authority to monitor the level of traffic generated by the permitted use and ensure the restoration of the site within agreed timescales to protect both local amenity and the local environment.

INFORMATIVES

A. This permission shall be read in conjunction with an agreement made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to control HGV routeing to and from the site, and the securing of all proposed permissive footpaths and public car parking area the rescinding of all previously permitted sand extraction rights held by the applicant at the application site.

B. The applicant is advised that should protected species be present work must stop and Natural England be informed. A licence may be required from Natural England before works can re-commence, Natural England will advise.

C. The Environmental Health Authority, Horsham District Council, may use their powers under the Control of Pollution Act 1974 (COPA) to enforce against any nuisance (including waste disposal, water pollution, noise, atmospheric pollution and public health; and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid) from the site. For any queries on this matter, please contact the Environmental Health Department of Horsham District Council on 01403 215641.

D. The applicant is advised that all mineral extraction operations must be carried out in accordance with HSE requirements and the Quarry Regulations 1999. The applicant should contact the HSE prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted to ensure that they are fully compliant with the required health and safety requirements.

E. The attention of the applicant is drawn to sections 1.2.1 and 2.6.4 (a) of the ARC report ARC report submitted to the County Planning Authority on 06 October 1993) in support of planning permission SG/37/93 (granted 05 July 1994)). It should be read in conjunction with Condition 8 of the permission.

F. In determining this planning application, the County Planning Authority has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with the planning application by liaising with consultees, respondents and the applicant/agent and discussing changes to the proposal where considered appropriate or necessary. This approach has been taken positively and proactively in accordance with the requirement in the NPPF, as set out in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No.2) Order 2012.