THIS REPORT RELATES STIRLING COUNCIL TO ITEM 14 ON THE AGENDA ENVIRONMENT & HOUSING ECONOMY, PLANNING & REGULATION 19 SEPTEMBER 2013 NOT EXEMPT MURRAYSHALL QUARRY, GILLIES HILL, CAMBUSBARRON 1 SUMMARY 1.1 This report provides an update on the actions taken following the Council’s decision of 1 March 2012 and subsequent resolution of 11 October 2012 to make a Suspension Order for the purpose of the protection of the environment at Murrayshall Quarry. 1.2 The report also provides an update on engagement with the Quarry Operator and Landowner over the submission of a full and comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as per the motion agreed at the Council meeting of 27 June 2013 and furthermore, provides a full and comprehensive options appraisal of the actions available to the Council including, but not limited to, the reconsideration of extraction rights, revocation of permission and/or land purchase by the Council also as per the motion agreed by Council on the 27 June 2013. 2 OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Committee:- 2.1 Instructs officers to continue to engage with the Quarry Operator and landowners with a view to securing a full Environmental Impact Assessment in association with a Review of Old Mineral Permission (ROMP) application for the whole Quarry site, prior to any re-activation of the Quarry; 2.2 In the event that a Review of Old Mineral Permission / Environmental Impact Assessment application is not submitted and it is evident that the Quarry Operator intends to recommence extraction at the Quarry in advance of the 2017 Review date, to instruct officers to prepare a further Report to Council outlining the steps necessary to suspend the ability of the Operator from extracting minerals from the site. 3 CONSIDERATIONS Background Grant of Planning Permission – 1982: 3.1 Planning permission for Murrayshall Quarry was granted by Stirling District Council in 1982. The period of the consent extends to 2042, in accordance with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. 3.2 Quarrying at Murrayshall ceased in 1996 and no quarrying operations have resumed since. Two companies; Tarmac, who undertook extraction until 1996, and latterly Hanson, now Patersons of Greenoakhill, who recently took up the lease to work the remaining areas, have planning permission to extract material from Murrayshall Quarry. While Tarmac (now LaFarge Tarmac) owns their portion of the Quarry, Patersons lease their portion from the landowners, Drygrange Estates. Review of Old Mineral Permission – 2002: 3.3 In 2002, as required by the Environment Act 1995, Stirling Council carried out a Review of Old Mineral Permissions for the Quarry and issued a new set of conditions. A further review of the conditions is due in 2017. Intent to Resume Quarrying – 2006: 3.4 In late 2006, Hanson indicated that they intended re-commencing operations at Murrayshall Quarry and requested the Council’s opinion on using the existing forestry road (between the Quarry and Polmaise Road) to extract material. The Council advised that this would require a new planning application to vary the conditions. No application has been received to date. 3.5 The local community, aware of proposals by Hanson to re-activate Murrayshall, raised the issue that an Environmental Impact Assessment should have been carried out at the time of the review of the conditions in 2002. 3.6 In January 2008, following legal advice, the Council accepted that an Environmental Impact Assessment, as required by European Directive, should have been, but was not, carried out as part of the 2002 review process. The Council agreed to explore a voluntary approach with the operators of the quarry to seek a court action to set aside the 2002 review and provide an extension to the time limit for an Environmental Impact Assessment to be undertaken. 3.7 Tarmac advised that they had no intention of undertaking any extraction at the Quarry before 2017 and therefore saw no need to incur costs at this stage. Hanson and Drygrange Estates indicated that they had no immediate plans to recommence operations. Both operators of the quarry and the land owners confirmed that they were not willing to join the Council in a voluntary action to the Court of Session to have the 2002 review set aside. The Council was unable to take this action without their support. Petition submitted to Stirling Council – 2010: 3.8 Cambusbarron Community Council submitted a petition calling on the Council to offer support to the Community Council to take direct action through the courts, if necessary, to have the 2002 review set aside. The Petitions Panel on 14 June 2010 agreed to refer the matter for consideration by Council. 3.9 The Council, in 24 June 2010, recognised the concerns of the local community and agreed to work with Cambusbarron Community Council to secure a binding written commitment from the owners and operators of Murrayshall Quarry that they would not exercise their quarrying consents before the next scheduled review of conditions in 2017, at which time an Environmental Impact Assessment could be undertaken and the conditions amended as necessary. 3.10 The Council also agreed that if such binding commitments were not received, it would work with and support Cambusbarron Community Council in identifying and pursuing such appropriate legal action as was necessary to prevent quarrying taking place before the 2017 review. 3.11 In respect of paragraph 3.9, Tarmac advised that they were "prepared to enter into an agreement not to undertake quarry operations pending the periodic review of the consent in 2017". Drygrange Estates and Hanson advised that neither party separately could agree to a binding commitment as this would prejudice their lease agreement with the other party. Given this stated position of both parties, the Council requested that both Hanson and Drygrange Estates seek mutual agreement of both parties that quarrying will not resume until after the 2017 review. Neither Drygrange Estates nor Hanson responded to the Council in this respect at that time. Council Decision – March 2011: 3.12 In March 2011 it was reported to Council that an Environmental Impact Assessment would require to be undertaken for the next review of the permission which would take place in 2017. As it did not appear possible to secure the voluntary agreement of all parties that quarrying would not resume before the next scheduled review, the Council had sought the opinion of Senior Counsel on the available and appropriate legal action with regard to supporting the Community Council in seeking to challenge the 2002 review. (Counsel’s opinion had previously been obtained in 2007 but it was thought appropriate to seek further advice in view of the passage of time and some further questions which had arisen). 3.13 Senior Counsel advised that the opportunity to challenge the 2002 Review of Old Mineral Permission had passed and that the Council should deal with the situation as if there was a valid and extant planning consent. The Council agreed that it would be beneficial to obtain a non-statutory Environmental Appraisal for Murrayshall Quarry, to establish whether any environmental conditions should have been imposed in 2002. If so, it would form the basis for further negotiations with the owner and operators of the Quarry on appropriate operating conditions. The Environmental Appraisal would also inform the Council as to whether there was any need for a Suspension Order to protect the environment pending resumption of quarrying whenever that may take place. 3.14 It should be noted here that Cambusbarron Community Council strongly challenged the opinion of Senior Counsel that the opportunity to challenge the 2002 Review of Old Mineral Permission had passed, based, amongst other points, on Article 9 of the Aarhus Convention relating to access to justice on environmental matters and their own legal advice which considered that a challenge was still feasible. 3.15 The Council also agreed at that time to provide funding of £5000 to support the Community Council in initiating legal action, but this could not be pursued without further financial support from the Council. Implementation of Council Decision: 3.16 Environmental consultants, Ironside Farrar, were commissioned by the Council to undertake and report on a non-statutory Environmental Appraisal for Murrayshall Quarry and to review the existing planning conditions that related to the site. The Environmental Appraisal was conducted between October 2011 and January 2012. Ironside Farrar reviewed the current 28 planning conditions relating to Murrayshall Quarry against best practice and environmental baseline and although these were not informed by an Environmental Impact Assessment, they concluded that they were sufficient to allow the planning authority to exercise control over quarry operations. 3.17 Cambusbarron Community Council did not accept the main conclusions of the Ironside Farrar Report that the Planning conditions provided sufficient control and also considered that the Report did not comply with the primary intention of the brief which was to establish whether significant environmental issues existed which would warrant the use of a Suspension Order. Council Decision - March 2012: 3.18 The results of the Environmental Impact Appraisal were reported to Council on 1 March 2012 and the Council then agreed:- 3.18.1 to instruct officers to require the quarry operators to produce an Environmental Impact Assessment for Murrayshall Quarry; 3.18.2 to instruct officers to require the quarry operators to produce an updated Quarry Restoration Plan ; 3.18.3 to instruct officers to require the quarry operators to undertake all fencing at Murrayshall Quarry in accordance with planning requirements; 3.18.4 to instruct officers to establish a Quarry Liaison Group with representation from land owners, quarry operators, Cambusbarron Community Council and Stirling Council; 3.18.5 to a statutory motion being presented to the first Council meeting after 1 September 2012 for a Suspension Order in respect of the working of minerals at Murrayshall Quarry in the event that the land owners and quarry operators failed to comply with the above decisions.