APPLICATION NO: 07/00570/FUL VALIDATION 30 March 2007 DATE:

AGENT: Land and Mineral Management Ltd, 40 Road, Cirencester, , GL7 2HX.

APPLICANT: Elliott and Sons Ltd, Stella Way, Bishops Cleeve, Cheltenham, GL52 7DQ.

SITE: Land at Shurdington Road, Bentham

PROPOSAL: Sand extraction and ancillary development with restoration back to original levels by infilling with inert materials.

PARISH OF: Badgeworth SITE AREA: 2.12Ha

GRID REF: 908,180

RECOMMENDED: That planning permission is GRANTED for the reasons set out within this report and summarised at paragraphs 7.13 and 7.14, and subject to the conditions detailed at section 8 of this report.

1.0 LOCATION

1.1 The application site is located adjacent to the Shurdington Road (A46) approximately half a kilometre to the south-west of the village of Shurdington and lies in the parish of Badgeworth.

1.2 The application site is surrounded by agricultural land in arable or pasture use. The application site itself comprises the western third of a large arable field from which a small part of the southern corner was subject of previous extraction and inert infilling that ceased in 2004. The ground has since been reinstated back to agricultural land and forms part of the field.

1.3 The application area is bounded by field hedgerows to the west and north and a track forms the southern boundary. The hedgerows are quite mature and, although thinning, are interspersed with occasional mature trees. There are no existing landscape or man made features defining the eastern boundary.

1.4 The ground is relatively level. However, towards the east of the application site the land does starts to fall slightly down a small valley feature through which a small stream flows.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 1

1.5 The former quarry was previously served by a long track/haul road of nearly a kilometre in length with direct access onto the A46, which is tarmaced for approximately half a kilometre. The track/haul road and access arrangements form part of this application.

1.6 There are no public rights of way in the immediate vicinity of the extraction site, the nearest is the Gloucestershire Way approximately 250m to the north west, although the haul road does run adjacent to the Gloucestershire Way for approximately 300 metres.

1.7 The nearest properties to the extraction area are found at Brook Villa Farm to the south and Badgeworth Lane to the east, all at around 400m away. The properties on Badgeworth Lane are approximately 220m at their closest point to the haul road.

1.8 The site lies outside the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The AONB boundary lies to the east of the A46 approximately 350m away. The site lies within the Cheltenham and Green Belt.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The Applicant is applying for planning permission to extract soft building sand from the remaining reserves which were not fully worked when operations closed in 2004.

2.2 The proposals involve the extraction of 40,000 tonnes of sand over 4 years at a rate of 10,000 tonnes per annum. The actual extraction area will be 0.8 hectares out of a total application area of 2.2 hectares. Restoration will progressively follow sand extraction operations using imported inert waste, to ensure that final restoration to agriculture at original ground levels will be completed by the end of the sixth year from commencement.

2.3 The proposals do not include the establishment of any fixed washing/screening plant. All sand from the application area will be processed on site by the use of industry recognised mobile processing and material handling equipment.

2.4 The following is a summary of the information which the applicant has supplied in support of the application:

2.5 The proposal is to extract 40,000 tonnes of soft building sand and restore the site by infilling with inert material. The site area covers approximately 2.2 ha with the extraction area totalling 0.8 ha. The additional land covers operational needs such as soil storage, stand offs and the quarry haul

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 2

road. The annual extraction rate will be approximately 10,000 tonnes of sand with backfilling of similar quantities of inert material to restore the ground similar to its original levels.

2.6 The site would be worked and progressively restored in four phases. The direction of working would be south to north for phases 1 to 3 on the western side of the extraction area. Phase 4 forms a long strip down the eastern boundary and would be worked in the opposite direction from north to south, see drawing no 5998-500-002. Mineral extraction in each phase would last approximately 1 year followed by a year’s worth of infilling afterwards. The total working life of the site would last approximately 5 years and the applicant is seeking permission for 6 years to ensure sufficient time is allowed for restoration activities.

2.7 The sand from Shurdington is a finer sand than that dug in the Cotswold Water Park and is suitable for building and mortar specifications which Water Park mineral cannot meet. The applicant is currently sourcing this type of sand from outside of the county, from Faringdon in Oxfordshire and near Solihull in the Midlands.

2.8 The inert material to be used for infilling will be non recyclable materials which cannot be recovered for use either as soils or secondary aggregate materials. This material will be sourced from the Gloucester and Cheltenham areas. The majority of this type of material is currently going to landfill in the Cotswold Water Park and this proposal represents an alternative beneficial use which has the additional benefit of being closer to the inert waste source.

2.9 The applicant has submitted a second planning application nearby for an inert recycling facility. Should permission be granted for this facility the applicant would use the reject material from there as restoration material for the mineral void. This would avoid the need for separately imported to the site and avoid the need, as mentioned previously, for the material to be removed and transported some distance to disposal sites in the Cotswold Water Park.

2.10 There is no built development proposed with this application. Only mobile plant will be used on site and this will include the following machines operating on a daily basis:

• 360 degree hydraulic excavator • Dry Screen • Loading Shovel

Further mobile plant may be used occasionally for soil stripping and restoration activities (dumptrucks/bulldozers). It may also be necessary to

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 3

deploy an electric pump for occasional dewatering of the quarry floor.

2.11 The initial operations would involve the stripping of topsoil and subsoil from phase 1 with its placement in separate storage bunds. These bunds would be a maximum of 3 metres high and would be grass seeded and kept free from weeds. The sand would be excavated by a 360 degree hydraulic excavator, which once a void had been created, would be positioned on the quarry floor. The sand would be moved by loading shovel to a dry screen for processing. The loading shovel would also load the sand into lorries for transportation off site.

2.12 The sand would be processed by means of a dry screen, which would be located adjacent to the soil storage bunds on the area which was previously extracted and filled. Any temporary stockpiles of material would also be located here adjacent to the screen.

2.13 The infilling operations would be approximately one phase behind the sand extraction. As extraction commenced into phase 2, the soils from phase 2 would be stripped, then added to the soil storage bunds, and the infilling of phase 1 would commence. The stripped soils from phase 3 would not be stored but placed directly onto phase 1 for its final reinstatement. Similarly the soils for phase 4 would be stripped and placed directly on phase 2. The soils stored in the bunds would be used in the restoration of phases 3 and 4.

2.14 A standoff of 3 metres would be maintained to the hedgerow on the west and northern boundaries. A temporary fence would be erected to mark the site boundary on the eastern side which would be removed upon restoration.

2.15 The applicant will use the existing track and access to reach the A46. Along the section of haul road which shares its route with the Gloucestershire Way physical obstructions will be placed to provide a separate route for users of the Gloucestershire Way.

2.16 One person would be directly employed on site full time and there would be associated driving employment equivalent to 1 driver. The applicant wishes to apply for working hours, covering all aspects of soil movements, mineral extraction, infilling and vehicle movements, of 7:30am to 5:30pm on Mondays to Fridays and 7:30am to 1pm on Saturdays with no working on Sundays or public holidays. However the applicant does not envisage that extraction or filling operations will take place on Saturdays.

2.17 The traffic generated from this proposal will be limited. Even without backloading for the importation of restoration material (which would reduce the overall movements) this proposal would only generate

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 4

approximately 10 movements/day (i.e. 5 in and 5 out) during a five day working week, based on average lorry payloads of 16 tonnes/day. The traffic movements equate to a maximum one lorry movement each way every 2 hours.

2.18 Public Rights of Way (PROW) The haul road shares the route of the Gloucestershire Way for approximately 300metres from its access onto the A46. The combined use of the quarry haul road with the Gloucestershire Way has existed for over 40 years. The quarry haul road is tarmaced and has lorry passing places for the first 300 metres which it shares with the Gloucestershire Way.

2.19 The applicant proposes to widen the carriageway where necessary and place boulders, or some similar obstructions, to segregate a section of the road for the benefit of footpath users and ensure that vehicles and pedestrian do not mix. It is considered that this will protect the interests of the footpath and will ensure that the footpath can be safely used.

2.20 Visual Impacts Potential views of the proposed operations have been identified by carrying out a visual impact assessment. The development will not be readily visible from the nearest residential properties. Few public views are attainable of the site and are from the surrounding rights of way, the impact on these is considered to be negligible to slight impact. In the wider landscape, with views from elevated points such as the Cotswold Escarpment, the impact is also considered slight to negligible. With the restoration of the site back to agriculture at original ground levels there will be no impact on the landscape character of the area.

2.21 Noise and Dust The quarry is situated in a remote location and the extraction area is 400 metres away from the nearest residential properties. There will be minimal plant in the quarry and the extraction and the majority operations will be take place below ground levels. In terms of noise, the applicant will ensure all plant is maintained in accordance with manufacturer’s specification. It is not anticipated that there will be any adverse noise/dust impacts from the limited scale of the operations proposed and therefore, the combined effects of these proposals are considered to be minimal and will have no significant impact.

2.22 Restoration and Aftercare The proposals involve restoration back to agricultural land at the original ground levels. Imported infill will be stable, inert material which will not give rise to any land stability or potential contamination issues. The original soil profiles will be reinstated across the site. As can be seen

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 5

from the land surrounding the site, previous extraction and infilling operations have been successful in restoration the land back to agriculture at original ground levels. Once the ground has been reinstated the land will be managed for agriculture together with the adjoining field.

2.23 Concluding The County’s landbank figure is currently below recommended government levels, and there remains ongoing planning problems in maintaining the supply of this particular type of sand. This proposal will make a contribution to ensuring that the county maintains an adequate and steady supply of minerals central to government policy and the MLP.

2.24 The site is for a small scale operation which will have minimal impact on the surroundings and given its proximity to the Gloucester and Cheltenham markets it offers a more sustainable location than the Water Park sites.

2.25 The principle of sand extraction and infilling has previously been accepted by grant of planning permission although an application for renewal of that consent was refused. This proposal differs from the previous permission and in addition has to be viewed in the context of a reduction in the County landbank together with issues of the supply of non Water Park sand.

2.26 The site is in the Green Belt but it is not considered to conflict with the aims of Green Belt policy as the proposals are only temporary, of a maximum 6 years duration. The site can be operated with minimal disturbance to the surrounding area and will not have a significant visual impact. Furthermore, a high standard of restoration can be demonstrably achieved.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

2.27 As the proposed development falls into Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations 1999 whereby an EIA may be required to accompany a planning application due to the potential significant effects of the development and an environmental statement did not accompany the application, a screening opinion on the need for an EIA was carried out. In determining whether or not a development may have significant effects and require EIA, consideration has to be made to the scale, location and nature of the development. Following consultation with the appropriate consultees, it would not, in the opinion of this Authority, be likely that the scheme would have a significant effect on the environment in terms of the requirement for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). An environmental statement was therefore not requested.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 6

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

Planning Development Decision & Date Ref T.3245 Sand extraction and access Refused 19th March 1960 T.3245/a Sand extraction and access Refused 20th September 1960 T.3245/b Sand extraction and improvement Granted 19th December 1961. of existing access to A46. T.3245/c Extension to sand extraction Granted 18th September 1962 T.3245/d Asphalt plant for 24 months for M5 Granted 25th July 1969 motorway construction T.5880 Extension to sand extraction Granted 31st January 1972 T.3245/E Storage of aggregates, batch plant Refused 20th September 1970 and septic tank T.6818 Tipping to raise levels by 1.5240m Granted 6th March 1978 to improve drainage T.3245/C/1 Tipping for restoration of mineral Granted 21st September 1978 workings to agriculture T.3245/I Sand extraction and restoration by Granted 23rd November 1979 inert tipping T.3245/G Concrete batching plant and Dismissed at appeal on 16th alteration to access. January 1980 T.5880/A/1 Retention of weighbridge and Granted 15th July 1980 (until office (T.5880) 31/03/72) T.3245/J Tipping of inert material to restore Refused 16th September 1981 to agriculture T.3245/K Extension to tip to raise level of Granted 1982 field T.5880/A/2 Retention of weighbridge and Granted 10th February 1983 office (T.5880) (until 31/12/83) T.1762/B Mineral extraction and restoration Granted 21st December 1983 by tipping T.7748 Mineral extraction and restoration Withdrawn by tipping T.7748/A Mineral extraction and restoration Refused 25th September 1984 by tipping T.7748/B Mineral extraction and restoration Granted 26th February 1986 by tipping T.3245/M Compound connected with mineral Granted 27th February 1986 extraction T.3245/F/1 Retention of weighbridge and Granted 26th February 1986 office (T5880) (until 31/12/93) T.3245/C/1 12 month extension to tipping to Granted 21st November 1990

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 7

T.3245/K allow satisfactory agricultural T.3245/I restoration. 94/7748/0401/ Extraction of Sand Granted 4th July 1994 (until 4th FUL July 1999) 94/3245/0402/ Retention of compound Granted 4th July 1994 (until 4th FUL July 1999) 94/3245/0403/ Retention of weighbridge and Granted 4th July 1994 (until 4th FUL office July 1999) 96/7748/0847/ Variation to permit screening and Granted 5th November 1996 FUL crushing of waste. 96/9958/0953/ Mineral extraction and restoration Granted 17th December 1996 FUL by tipping T/98/3245/13 Retention of compound Granted 4th March 1999 (until 81/FUL 04/04/03) T/98/3245/13 Retention of weighbridge and Granted 4th March 1999 (until 79/FUL office 04/04/03) T/99/3245/06 Extension of bund Refused 12th November 1999 40/FUL T/01/9958/11 Area for Screening and Crushing in Granted 1st May 2002 97/FUL connection with Back Filling of Sand Extraction T/03/3245/10 Extension of planning to complete Refused 15th July 2003 58/FUL sand extraction, backfilling & recycling of inert waste, storage compound & weighbridge Enforcement Notice to cease Issued 3rd December 2004 extraction, inert infilling and recycling operations and restore the site. 07/00569/FUL Recycling of inert waste with Submitted 30 March 2007 – ancillary development. awaiting determination

4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 Under Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act (1990) the Planning Authority must have regard to the development plan in considering planning applications unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

4.2 The introduction of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 introduces a new system of development plans defined as Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents. The new system is being brought into effect through a series of commencement orders and transitional arrangements apply until the full introduction of the Act. The effect of the transitional arrangements means that the Planning Authority

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 8

continues to consider those development plans that existed on 28 September 2004 when determining planning applications. The transitional arrangements continue until 13 May 2007 or when a new policy expressly replaces an old policy by being published, adopted or approved.

Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management

4.3 PPS10 encourages communities to take responsibility for their own waste and to enable waste to be disposed of in one of the nearest appropriate installations. The statement promotes sustainable waste management whereby waste is moved up the waste hierarchy of reduction, reuse, recycling and composting and waste to energy, with waste disposal to landfill as a last resort.

4.4 In finding suitable sites for enhanced waste management facilities, industrial sites are identified for consideration.

4.5 When determining planning applications the PPS is a material consideration which may supersede policies in development plans and Waste Planning Authorities should therefore not place requirements on applicants which are inconsistent with the PPS.

4.6 In considering applications for waste management facilities the statement indicates that authorities should consider the likely impact on the local environment and amenity. In respect of noise the PPS indicates that considerations will include the proximity of sensitive receptors and that it may be appropriate to use planning conditions to control noise impacts.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 2: Green Belts (2001)

4.7 PPG 2 outlines the government’s policy on Green Belts confirming their fundamental purpose as preventing urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. The five aims of including land in Green Belts are: - to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; - to prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another; - to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; - to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and - to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

4.8 The guidance confirms that there is a general presumption against inappropriate development within green belt. It is for the applicant to show very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development and justify why permission should be granted. In such circumstances, it must be shown that other considerations are outweighed against the

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 9

inappropriate development in the greenbelt. The PPG noting that mineral extraction is a temporary activity considers mineral extraction may not be inappropriate development conflicting with the purposes of the Green Belt provided that high environmental and restoration standards are applied.

Regional Planning Guidance 10: Regional Planning Guidance for the South West (2001) and the Draft Regional Spatial Strategy (2006)

4.9 RPG 10 interprets the national planning policy framework at the South West regional level and is part of the statutory development plan. Policy RE3 looks to Mineral Planning Authorities and others to work towards identifying sufficient environmentally acceptable sources of supply to maintain an appropriate level of supplies for current and future needs. An apportionment figure is provided, the level of supply each area has to meet, although it is noted that the figures are under review.

4.10 The DRSS provides the broad development strategy for the region for the next twenty years. In its final form it will replace RPG 10 and the policies of the Region’s Structure Plans. The DRSS is therefore a material consideration, although the weight attached to this has to reflect its early stage of production. The DRSS continues the same policy tenet with RE10 on the Supply of Aggregates and with policy RE11 seeks Mineral Planning Authorities should make appropriate landbank provision of at least seven years worth of supply. New apportionment figures are identified in the DRSS.

Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review (Adopted 1999)

4.11 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 indicates that the Adopted Structure Plan’s Development Plan status must be considered. The following policies are relevant to the proposed development: • Policy GB.1 – Green Belt. • Policy M.1 – Supply of Minerals. • Policy M.7 – Maintenance of Aggregates Landbank. • Policy M.8 – Supply of Sand from Thames Valley • Policy NHE. 4 – Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. • Policy W.1 – Water Resources. • Policy P.1 – Pollution

Gloucestershire Structure Plan Third Alteration

4.12 The Third Alteration has had an Examination in Public in November/December 2003. Two sets of Proposed Modifications have been produced. In April 2005 a Secretary of State Direction was issued on the Plan. Due to this Direction, the Plan remains held in abeyance and will not be forwarded to adoption. However the policies

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 10

of the Third Alteration still remain as material considerations in the determination of planning applications. The policies not cited in the Direction have substantial weight as material considerations. The following policies are relevant to the proposed development:

• Policy MR.14 – Supply of Minerals • Policy MR.17 – Mineral Working and the Protection of the Environment. • Policy MR.18 – Mineral Transportation. • Policy MR.20 – Supply of Aggregates Landbank. • Policy MR.21 – Supply of Sand from Thames Valley. • Policy MR.7– Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (This policy is unchanged from the adopted Structure Plan Policy NHE.4). • Policy MR.10 – Pollution Impact

4.13 One of the policies cited in the Secretary of State Direction was Policy SD.9 on the Green Belt. The Secretary of State Direction wanted the policy to contain a commitment to review the Green Belt boundaries in relation to accommodating growth of the Principle Urban Areas in a sustainable way.

Gloucestershire Minerals Local Plan 1997 - 2006 (Adopted April 2003 )

4.14 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 indicates that the Adopted Minerals Local Plan’s Development Plan status must be considered. The following policies are relevant to the proposed development:

• Policy A4 - aggregate minerals workings outside preferred areas • Policy E9 - Green Belt • Policy E17 - Protection of public rights of way. • Policy DC2 - ancillary development • Policy DC3 - allows for the importation of natural materials where there is not enough mineral wastes arising on site to undertake development such as landscape or baffle bunds, roads or restoration uses. • Policy E20 - seeks to ensure mineral development will only be permitted where it does not give rise to unacceptable impact on highway safety. • Policy R1 - provides for the beneficial restoration of mineral sites with a number of criteria for consideration of the restoration details of a proposal including for restoration at the earliest opportunity. • Policy R3 - also seeks to secure progressive restoration of mineral sites.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 11

Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan 2011 (Adopted April 2006)

4.15 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 indicates that the Adopted Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan’s Development Plan status must be considered. The following policies are relevant to the proposed development:

Green Belt Policy GBR1 In the green belt, planning permission will not be granted for development other than: a) the construction of new buildings for the following purposes:

i) necessary for the efficient use of agriculture or forestry; ii) essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation, for cemeteries and or other uses of land which preserve the openness of the green belt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it; and iii) limited extension, alteration or replacement of dwellings provided that any extension or alteration does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building and that any replacement is not materially larger than the dwelling it replaces.

b) the re-use of buildings provided:

i) it does not have a materially greater impact than the present use on the openness of the green belt and the purposes of including land in it; ii) the proposal does not include any extension to the building or the associated use of land surrounding the building which would conflict with the openness of the green belt and the purposes of including land in it; iii) the building is of permanent and substantial construction and is capable of conversion without major or complete reconstruction; and iv) the form, bulk and general design of the building is in keeping with the surroundings

c) the carrying out of an engineering or other operation or the making of a material change in the use of land provided that it maintains the openness of the green belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land in it.

Access for Development

Policy TPT1 - Development will be permitted where:

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 12

(C) the traffic generated by and/or attracted to the development, together with that arising from other existing or planned development, would not impair the safety or satisfactory operation of the highway network, and (D) highway access can be provided to an appropriate standard which would not adversely affect the safety or satisfactory operation of the highway network, nor cause an unacceptable loss of amenity to users of adjacent land.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The application was advertised by a notice displayed on site and by a notice placed in the local newspaper. Near neighbor consultations were sent to properties in the vicinity of the site. 26 representations objecting to the proposal have been received. The main themes of the objections relate to traffic, noise and dust, highways and highway safety, green belt and AONB and operators past history.

5.2 There is concern about traffic impact for a number of reasons: highway safety issues on the A46 and Badgeworth Lane; the inadequate access onto the A46; the noise generated by HGVs particularly along Badgeworth Lane; and, the hazards to users of the footpath where the access road runs along side it. Noise is cited in the objections, the existing operations result in disturbance due to noise from the lorries, and also the noise from the concrete crushing activities and reversing bleepers. The failure of the operator to adhere to planning conditions in the past is cited, as well as querying the level/quality of restoration. Dust causing a nuisance, particularly from the crushing activities is also a concern raised, and a number of objectors make reference to the proximity of the primary school with this regard. Most of the objectors refer to an unacceptable impact upon the Green Belt, and many also refer to the AONB also being impacted upon. Concern over the effect the development proposals will have on wildlife is also mentioned by a number of objectors.

6.0 CONSULTATIONS

6.1 Tewkesbury Borough Council - Tewkesbury Borough Council have not made any representations on the application at the time of writing the report.

6.2 Badgeworth Parish Council - The Parish Council Objects to the application on the following grounds (these have been summarised): Inappropriate Development within the Green Belt. Unacceptable increase in heavy lorries both on the A46 and the junction of the site as well as surrounding roads. Impact on Public Footpaths. Particularly the Gloucestershire Way. Impact on local residents arising from noise and pollution from both the development and from lorries accessing the site

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 13

and using the site road, and roads surrounding the site. Impact of the development on local wildlife. The Parish Council has given separate consideration to each application as it does not feel that one is dependent upon the other. Of particular concern is the application relating to the recycling of inert waste. This seeks approval for a permanent facility which it is felt has no place in the green belt. If the County Council is minded to approve either of the two applications, the Parish Council seek a number of conditions relating to: Limiting the time periods for the developments to 3 years. Operating Hours, Hours of entry for lorries, along with the consideration of placing a weight restriction along the length of Badgeworth Lane. The Parish Council feels strongly that, after a considerable number of years (40) of sand extraction and recycling within this area, The County Council should refuse the current applications to recommence such activities.

6.3 Environment Agency – at the time of writing the report had not made any representations upon the application.

6.4 County Highways Representative – The County Highways representative states that “The proposal is for sand extraction and ancillary development. The site has previously operated in a similar manner in the past. The submission includes a Transport Assessment (TA), which describes the existing access, and the PROW (Gloucestershire Way) which co-exists along the access track.

The TA admits the deficiencies with the existing access, in terms of visibility, and layout, and the fact that there is no clear separation between the PROW and the access track. I accept the fact that the access onto the A46 at this location, has not had a direct correlation to reported accidents, and that new visibility interpretation guidance exists. Notwithstanding this I would seek the improvement of the access onto the A46 to ensure safe use during the permission, and a clear defined separation of the PROW with the access. Therefore I recommend that no highway objection be raised subject to the following conditions being attached to any permission granted:-

1. No works shall commence on site until details of an improved access to the site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The access shall then be completed in all respects in accordance with those details before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained as such thereafter.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

2. No works shall commence on site until details of a scheme to separate the PROW and the access track has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall then be completed in all

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 14

respects in accordance with those details before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained as such thereafter.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

3. No loaded lorries shall leave the site un-sheeted except those only carrying stone in excess of 500mm.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.”

6.5 Natural - Natural England has no comments to make on this application. The application does not appear to affect any Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and we are not aware of any protected species issues on the site.

7.0 OBSERVATIONS OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

7.1 Archaeology – The County Archaeological officer advises that “I have checked the proposed development site against the County Sites and Monuments Record. While there is no archaeology recorded there our records indicate that the locality contains extensive ridge-and-furrow earthworks indicative of arable cultivation. Elsewhere in the Severn vale such earthworks have been found to cover, and so mask, remains of prehistoric and Roman activity and settlement. For this reason it is my view that there is some potential for significant archaeological remains to be present below medieval and modern ploughsoils. However, I note that the proposed development area has already been partly worked, and that the area of new extraction amounts to a little less than a hectare. In view of the relatively small scale of the development it is my view that the risk of encountering significant archaeological remains on this site is fairly low. I have no further observations”

7.2 Landscape – The County Landscape consultant states that “It is clear, even in winter conditions with no leaves on trees, the site is well screened from most publicly accessible view points and only a few proximate properties have views/glimpses of the site. In views from the AONB, whilst the sites are visible they do form a small feature within a wider vista where a number of developments, including the Ensleigh offices and agricultural structures intrude more significantly into the greenbelt. Generally we would agree with the assessments made however we would question the following points: The report does not fully address views from the south and west, in particular from the footpaths in this area. The hedgerow on the western boundary is a significant feature in the landscape, with a number of mature trees within it. We don't believe the importance of this has been given sufficient recognition and are concerned that the 3m stand-off will not be sufficient to protect this. The site road is described as being tarmac construction. This is substantially eroded and it would in all

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 15

likelihood not provide the wheel cleaning function described. There is no consideration of the impact on the Gloucester Way of using the shared road as natural wheel cleaning. The report proposes some mitigation to separate site traffic from the Gloucester Way however we consider more detail is required to ensure that this can be achieved safely and without damage to existing vegetation, particularly around the existing gate and stile near the A46. Whilst the very short timescale of the operations would preclude any mitigation of the works themselves from planting the report does not address the issues of final restoration and improvement in respect of making good existing hedgerows, new hedgerow planting to re- establish historic boundary lines in the SW corner of the site, and treatment of the site road post completion., A formal restoration plan should be provided. No mention of the provision/location of staff welfare facilities.”

7.3 Ecology – The County Ecologist states that “Great Crested Newts, other amphibians and one reptile (all protected species) have been recorded nearby. These records probably relate to land to the southeast of the A46. It is noted in paragraphs 5.11 & 6.17 of the supporting statement that a standoff of 3 metres is proposed for the hedgerow on the northern and western boundaries. This does not appear to include all remnant hedgerow sections. I recommend that as far as possible all boundaries adjacent to and on the red line on drawing 5998-500-002 are maintained or established as hedgerow corridors of no less than 4 metres wide. Standoffs of 3 metres from the outer edge of all existing and new hedgerow lines should operate. The standoffs and new hedgerow planting should be included as part of a landscaping scheme and conditioned. Such a scheme would protect and benefit protected species (if they occur) but also provide nesting and feeding sites for farmland birds. A general advice note as follows is needed: If a protected species (such as any bat, great crested newt, water vole, otter, white-clawed crayfish, reptile, barn owl or any nesting bird) is discovered using a feature on site all work at the locality should cease. A suitably qualified ecological consultant or Natural England should be contacted and the situation assessed before operations can proceed. This action is necessary to ensure compliance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 and/or the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

The recommendations will help to conserve and enhance biodiversity (NERC Act S.40 and Policy E10 of the adopted MLP) and also assist the developer in not contravening wildlife legislation.”

Planning

7.4 The Applicant is applying for planning permission to extract 40,000 tonnes of sand over 4 years at a rate of 10,000 tonnes per annum from the

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 16

remaining reserves at the site which were not fully worked when operations closed in 2004. The applicant has also submitted an application in relation to an inert recycling facility on a nearby site, however whilst this application would provide a potential source for inert materials to restore the site subject to this application, this application is a separate application and should be determined on its own merits. The main considerations in determining this application relate to development within the green belt, traffic impacts, potential environmental impacts and any affect on residential amenity. In particular, whether the operations will be detrimental to the local amenity.

7.5 Although the site has a history of mineral extraction it is currently not worked or recognised as an established strategic resource, both in terms of the quantity of material remaining or as a preferred area for future mineral extraction as set out in the adopted Minerals Local Plan (MLP). Consequently, the consideration of the proposal falls under Policy A4 of the adopted MLP, which relates to aggregate working (which includes sand & gravel) outside of preferred areas. The key policy criteria of concern is also set out under part a, of policy A4. This relates to a demonstration that the proposal would make a positive contribution to meet any forecast shortfall in provision required to maintain the county's appropriate contribution to local, regional and national need for aggregate, specifically where such provision would be significantly more acceptable than a site or sites in a preferred area. The applicant provides a commentary in the supporting statement concerning the acceptability of mineral extraction both in terms of a comparison with existing supplies, remaining reserves and resources present in the county, and the potential contribution towards meeting the local, regional and national need for aggregate. Based on this information and records held by the Minerals Planning Authority, a case can clearly made for the proposals in the context of Policy A4.

7.6 The remaining landbank of permitted sand & gravel reserves for the county (as of 31/12/2005) was 6.07 years. This is almost an entire year's worth of under provision as necessary to meet the required 7-year landbank of permitted reserves as advised in the MLP. There are mineralogical differences and resulting aggregate uses in relation to the key remaining strategic resources of the Upper Thames Valley (UTV) / Cotswold Water Park (CWP) and Severn Vale Corridor. As noted by the applicant, the sand sourced from the proposal site is more acceptable as a building sand. This is not the case for the UTV / CWP area, which includes all of the preferred areas for sand & gravel extraction as set out in the MLP. The UTV / CWP resource is 'sharp' sand & gravel used more in concrete production. Consequently, the proposal would potential provide for a more varied supply of sand & gravel for aggregate use in the County.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 17

7.7 It is also worth noting that the previous application for an extension of time for sand extraction was refused in 2003 on the grounds of provision. This proposal was also considered under Policy A4 of the MLP. However at that time, there was no forecast shortfall in provision as the countywide landbank stood at just over 8 years (as at 31/12/2002). This meant that the proposal was considered against criteria b, of the Policy A4, which is more concerned with issues such as; site enhancement, improved after- use opportunities and the completion of working of residual resources. Under these circumstances the application did not provide sufficient evidence to satisfy the policy. Amongst other issues this was a key consideration for the refusal.

7.8 The proposal site lies within the Cheltenham-Gloucester Green Belt. Mineral working can potentially take place in the 'Green Belt', where it meets environmental standards and the site is restored to a beneficial after-use. Subject to the acceptability of the working programme and proposed site restoration scheme, it is considered that the Green Belt designation does not in itself represent a reason to refuse the application. The County Landscape consultant has provided no objection to the application noting that, even in winter conditions with no leaves on trees, the site is well screened from most publicly accessible view points and only a few proximate properties have views/glimpses of the site. In views from the AONB, whilst the sites are visible they do form a small feature within a wider vista where a number of developments, including the Ensleigh offices and agricultural structures intrude more significantly into the greenbelt. It is therefore considered that the proposal does not conflict with the Green Belt Policies, E9 of the MLP or GBR1 of the TBLP, or the purposes of including land within the Green belt.

7.9 The proposal includes a progressive restoration scheme with 4 separate phases. The storage of soils will take the shape of bunding along the southern part of the site or will be directly used in final reinstatement following the working of a previous phase. The final landform is envisaged to be back to level through the utilisation of 25,000m3 of imported infill (waste) material over a 4 to 5-year period. Part of the site has been previously restored, satisfactorily, following the refusal of the previous application. Additionally a large amount of land surrounding the site has been previously worked and restored back to agricultural land and is in production. Another issue relates specifically to the importation of infill (waste) material and impacts of this on the local highway network. This issue was highlighted during the previous application and was a reason for refusal. The County Highways representative has made no objection to the application, and therefore the impact of the import of material on the highway is considered acceptable. Taking this into account, along with the views of the County Landscape consultant, it is considered that the impact of the development upon the AONB will be negligible and therefore not in itself represent a reason for refusal.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 18

7.10 In terms of the impact of the development on local amenity, from both a noise and dust perspective, the operations will largely take place below ground level in the extraction area. There is no fixed or permanent plant proposed to be sited at the quarry, with mobile plant being used as required. The nearest sensitive receptor is some 400m away. With the site being well screened from most viewpoints and the operations being of a temporary nature, it is considered that with the use of appropriate planning conditions the effect of noise and dust on the local amenity can be mitigated. In terms of the impact of the proposals upon the highway, and highway safety, whilst the cumulative impact of the two proposals needs to be considered, the County Highways representative has made no objection subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions and therefore the proposal is considered not to conflict with Policy E20 of the Gloucestershire Minerals Local Plan, or Policy TPT1 of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan. There should be no significant impact upon local wildlife and neither the County Ecologist nor Natural England has objected to the application in this respect.

7.11 Both in terms of the scale of operation and timescale, the proposal represents a relatively small-scale working, which should be completed over a relatively short period of time, and therefore not duly conflict on the Green Belt or the purposes of including land within it. It is considered that local amenity issues such as noise, dust, traffic, pollution control, highway safety and visual impacts will not be unduly impacted upon so as to cause a reason for refusal and any impacts that may arise can be satisfactorily mitigated through the use of appropriate planning conditions attached to any permission granted.

Human Rights

7.12 From 2nd October 2000 the Human Rights Act 1998 has the effect of enshrining much of the European Convention on Human Rights in UK law. Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 guarantees a right to respect for private and family life, and Article 1 of the First Protocol guarantees the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions. However this proposal has been widely consulted upon and all of the representations received have been considered. I am of the opinion that the proposal does not represent undue interference with such rights and in any case since these rights are qualified, and have to be set against other considerations, any interference that there may be is considered to be justified.

Conclusions and Summary Reasons for Grant of Permission

7.13 The proposal is for the extraction of 40,000 tonnes of sand over 4 years at a rate of 10,000 tonnes per annum from the remaining reserves at the site which were not fully worked when operations closed in 2004. Both in

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 19

terms of the scale of operation and timescale, the proposal represents a relatively small-scale working, which should be completed over a relatively short period of time, and therefore not duly conflict on the Green Belt or the purposes of including land within it. It is considered that local amenity issues such as noise, dust, traffic, pollution control, highway safety and visual impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated through the use of appropriate planning conditions attached to any permission granted, is in accordance with the development plan and that there are no material considerations that indicate that the application should be refused.

7.14 This application has been determined in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Acts, and in the context of the Government’s current planning policy guidance and the relevant circulars, together with the relevant Development Plan policies, including the following:

Planning Policy Statement 10, Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS 10) Planning Policy Guidance Note 2, Green Belt Regional Planning Guidance 10: Regional Planning Guidance for the South West (2001) Policy RE3, and the Draft Regional Spatial Strategy (2006) Policy RE10 and Policy RE11

Gloucestershire Structure Plan Second Review, Adopted 1999 – Policies GB.1, M.1, M.7, M.8, NHE.4, W.1 and P.1

Gloucestershire Minerals Local Plan, Adopted 2003 – Policies A4, E9, E17, E20, DC2, DC3, R1 and R3.

Tewkesbury Local Plan 2001, adopted 2006, Policy GRB1 and TPT1

The summary of reasons for granting approval are as follows: The Council is of the opinion that the proposed development gives rise to no material harm, is in accordance with the development plan and that there are no material considerations that indicate that the decision should be made otherwise.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 Therefore, on balance, it is recommend that planning permission be granted for the reasons set out within this report and summarised at paragraphs 7.13 and 7.14 and subject to the following conditions:

COMMENCEMENT

1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Written notification of the commencement of development shall be sent to the Mineral

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 20

Planning Authority within 7 days of such commencement.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

DURATION

2. The development to which this permission relates shall cease and the site be restored in accordance with conditions 20, 21 and 22 within 6 years beginning from the date of commencement as notified under condition 1.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 72(5) of and paragraph 1 of part 1 of Schedule 5 to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

PRODUCTION LIMITS

3. The total amount of material leaving the site shall not exceed a level of 10,000 tonnes per annum, January to December, and shall not exceed a rate of 2000 tonnes per calendar month unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To define the scope of the application in the interests of highway safety to accord with Policy E20 of the Minerals Local Plan.

4. From the date of this permission the operators shall maintain records of their monthly production and shall make them available, within 14 days upon request, to the Mineral Planning Authority. All records shall be kept for at least 48 months.

Reason: In order that the output from the site can be monitored in the interests of highway safety and local amenity to accord with Policy E20 and DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

5. Only sand shall be removed from the site. There shall be no mineral waste materials removed from the site.

Reason: To define the scope of the application and minimise its impact in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

WORKING PROGRAMME, PHASING AND DIRECTION OF WORKING

6. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority, the working, restoration and aftercare shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted application, supporting statement and phasing plans as shown on drawing number 5998-500-002 dated 11 Jan 2006.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 21

Reason: To adequately control the development and minimise its impact in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

BUILDING AND PLANT

Permitted Development

7. Notwithstanding the provisions of parts 19 and 21 of schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order amending, replacing or re-enacting that Order), no fixed plant or machinery, buildings or structures shall be erected, extended, installed or replaced on any part of the quarry without the prior written approval of the Planning Manager.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the local environment in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

Removal of Plant and Machinery

8. All plant and machinery associated with the works shall be removed from the site within 3 months of completion of the works unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the local environment in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

HOURS OF WORKING

9. Except in emergencies where operations are required to protect life, limb or property, or unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority, operations (including the manoeuvring, loading or unloading of vehicles, processing and/or any primary or ancillary activity associated with the winning and working of minerals) shall take place between the hours of:

0730 – 1730 hours Monday to Friday 0730 – 1300 hours Saturday

No servicing, maintenance and testing of plant shall be carried out at the site between 1730 hours and 0730 hours on any day.

There shall be no working on Sundays or Local Bank or National Holidays.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the local environment in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 22

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Noise

10. All vehicles, plant and machinery operated within the site shall be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specification and shall be fitted with and use effective silencers.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the local environment in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan. Lighting

11. Details of any/all external floodlighting and other illumination proposed at the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Manager prior to its erection at the site. These details shall include: height of the floodlighting posts, intensity of the lights (specified in Lux levels), spread of light including approximate light spillage to the rear of floodlighting posts (in metres), any measures proposed to minimise the impact of the floodlighting or disturbance through glare (such as shrouding), and the time when such lights will be illuminated. The proposals shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the local environment in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

12. No vehicles shall be stored or maintained on the site other than those involved in the mineral extraction and processing operations hereby approved.

Reason: To maintain control over the site in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Policy E20 and DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

13. Material stored on site and any plant, machinery and vehicles operating on top of it shall not exceed a height of 3 metres above ground level unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

WATER PROTECTION AND POLLUTION

14. Any above ground storage tanks should be sited on an impervious base and surrounded by a suitable liquid tight bunded compound. No drainage outlet should be provided. The bunded area should be capable of containing 110% of the volume of the largest tank and all pipes, draw pipes and sight gauges should be enclosed within its curtilage. The vent pipe should be directed downwards onto the bund.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 23

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with policy E11 of the Minerals Local Plan.

ACCESS, TRAFFIC AND PROTECTION OF THE HIGHWAY

15. No commercial vehicles shall enter the public highway unless their wheels and chassis have been cleaned to prevent materials being deposited on the highway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety to prevent mud and dust getting on the highway in accordance with Policy E20 of the Minerals Local Plan and Policy TPT1 of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan.

16. No loaded lorry shall leave the site unsheeted except those only carrying material in excess of 500mm.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy E20 of the Minerals Local Plan and Policy TPT1 of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan.

17. No direct public trade or business operation shall be carried out from the site in association with the development hereby approved.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy E20 of the Minerals Local Plan and Policy TPT1 of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan.

18. No works shall commence on site until details of a scheme to separate the PROW and the access track has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority. The scheme shall then be completed in all respects in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained as such thereafter for the duration of the use.

Reason: In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety in accordance with Policy E20 and E17 of the Minerals Local Plan and Policy TPT1 of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan.

19. Prior to the commencement of development, an improved vehicular access shall be laid out and constructed in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority. The access shall then be completed in all respects in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained as such thereafter for the duration of the use.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 24

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory means of access is provided and maintained in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy E20 of the Minerals Local Plan and Policy TPT1 of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan.

LANDSCAPING, RESTORATION AND AFTERCARE

Landscaping

20. Prior to the commencement of development a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the proposals for the management and protection of the hedgerows which screen the site, including proposals for it’s reinstatement should it die or become diseased or be removed for any reason. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity to ensure the site is adequately screened during the development and the existing landscape features protected in accordance with policy DC1 of the Minerals Local Plan.

Restoration

21. The restoration scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted information, with progressive restoration undertaken in accordance with the phased development shown on drawing number 5998-500-002 dated 11 Jan 2006, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the satisfactory restoration of the site in accordance with policy R1 and DC3 of the Minerals Local Plan.

Aftercare

22. Within 6 months of the date of this permission, details of an Aftercare scheme for the site, to be carried out for a period of 5 years for each phase in line with the progressive restoration of the site, shall be submitted to the Mineral Planning Authority, for approval in writing. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Mineral Planning Authority, the details shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the satisfactory management of areas of planting in accordance with policy R1 and DC3 of the Minerals Local Plan.

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 25

PRIOR CESSATION

23. If the winning and working of minerals stops for a period of more than 12 months before the completion of the approved restoration scheme a modified restoration scheme to include aftercare details shall be submitted for approval to the Planning Manager. This scheme shall be submitted within two years of the winning and working stopping, or within such other period as may be otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Manager. The approved scheme shall be carried out within one year of the written approval unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Manager.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the local area and to ensure that the quarry is restored to an acceptable condition in accordance with Policy R1 of the Gloucestershire Minerals Local Plan.

Notes to Applicant 1. If a protected species (such as any bat, great crested newt, water vole, otter, white-clawed crayfish, reptile, barn owl or any nesting bird) is discovered using a feature on site all work at the locality should cease. A suitably qualified ecological consultant or Natural England should be contacted and the situation assessed before operations can proceed. This action is necessary to ensure compliance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 and/or the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

CONTACT OFFICERS: David Pitt, Senior Planning Officer. Gloucester 426063

Gillian Parkinson Legal and Democratic Services Gloucester 425212

Application History. Consultee Time taken (weeks) Tewkesbury Borough Council No response Badgeworth Parish Council 4 weeks 1 day Environment Agency No response Archaeology 2 days County Highways 11 weeks 5 days Landscape/Ecology 2 weeks Natural England 2 weeks 1 day County Minerals Policy 3 weeks 4 days Time taken (to Committee). 16 weeks 3 days

DC JULY07 3 DP…/ComReps 26