|
Return
to Agenda
ITEM PN7
PLANNING
& REGULATION COMMITTEE –
24 FEBRUARY 2003
APPLICATION
FOR INTEGRATED WORKING AND RESTORATION SCHEME FOR LIMESTONE EXTRACTION
FOR AGGREGATE PRODUCTION AND RECONSTITUTED STONE PRODUCTS AT BURFORD QUARRY
(FORMERLY BECKSTONES) - APPLICATION NO. W2002/1726
Report by
Director of Environmental Services
Introduction
- The operators
at Burford Quarry, Ennstone Breedon Ltd, have made an application to
extend Burford Quarry and implement a new restoration scheme for the
existing quarry and proposed extension.
- The application
is identical to the one refused by this Committee on 29 July 2002 (ref.
W2001/1592). The refusal notice was issued on 9 August 2002. The committee
report and committee minute (50/02) are at Annex
1. The applicant appealed against the decision and a public
inquiry was scheduled to start on 7 May. This has now been postponed
until later in the year (September/October).
- The current application
was received on 25 September 2002. At the same time the applicants also
made two other applications, one for a determination of new planning
conditions (under the Review of Old Minerals Permissions [ROMP] procedure
in the Environment Act 1995) and one for continuing to operate the existing
quarry without complying with condition 15 (condition 15 limits annual
production to 45,000 tonnes and the applicant wants to extract 145,000
tonnes). Discussions are continuing in connection with the ROMP application
and consultations are continuing on the ‘condition 15’ application.
Background
- Details of the
site and the proposal are set out at Annex
1(report to the July 2002 meeting).
- The recommendation
made in the committee report for the previous application was for approval
subject to advertising the application as a departure from the development
plan, prior completion of legal agreements and 18 conditions. It was
recommended that if agreements were not completed in six months the
application should be refused for reasons set out in the report. In
the event, the Committee refused the application and the reasons are
also set out as part of Annex
1.
Consultations
- Consultation replies
and representations to the second application are set out at Annex
2.
Comments
of the Director of Environmental Services
- As with any planning
application the application should be determined in accordance with
the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The relevant matters are set out in the previous report (Annex
1 of this report). No further issues have
been raised in connection with the new application, which were not before
the Committee when it considered the original application in July 2002.
- I consider that
as the previous identical application is to be the subject of a public
inquiry, where all the issues will be put before an Independent Inspector,
there is no merit in determining this application in advance of that
Inquiry. Therefore, deferral of the application until the Inspector
has made a decision on the previous application is recommended.
Environmental
Implications
- These are set
out in the report.
Financial
and Staff Implications
- There are none
unless the current application is approved. In that case the appeal
would be unnecessary and I would expect the appellant to withdraw the
appeal. I would also expect the other two applications to be withdrawn
as they, too, would be unnecessary. The costs and staff time involved
in dealing with the appeal and processing the applications would not
then be incurred.
RECOMMENDATION
- The Committee
is RECOMMENDED to defer consideration of Application No. W2002/1726
until the Appeal against the refusal of Application No. W2001/1592 has
been determined.
DAVID
YOUNG
Director of
Environmental Services
Background Papers: Burford Quarry – Integrated Working and Restoration
Scheme for Limestone Extraction 8.5/2709/2 in Land Use Division, Environmental
Services, Speedwell House, Oxford
Contact Officer: John Duncalfe, tel: Oxford 815356
29January 2003
Return to TOP
|