Hampshire County Council

Cabinet

24 September 2007

County Council

27 September 2007

Approval for public consultation of the Hampshire Minerals Plan (Preferred Option)

Report of the Director of Environment

Item 6

Contact: Jeremy Smith, ext 6730 email: jeremy.smith@hants.gov.uk

1. Summary

1.1 This report sets out the background to the process for developing the Hampshire Minerals Plan and how a consultation paper on 'Preferred Options' is required. It outlines the principal issues that are addressed in the consultation paper and recommends that it be published for public comment. A draft of the consultation paper is available for viewing in the Members' rooms.

1.2 It is proposed that the National Park Authority and the County and City Councils publish the 'Preferred Options' consultation paper in October. The paper is a consultation which puts before the public for comment various issues and emerging preferred locations for mineral extraction, aggregate recycling and landfill. None of the conclusions in the paper or the technical supporting documents formally commits Authorities to particular sites or locations.

1.3 This decision sets out preferred locations and approaches for future minerals and landfill development in Hampshire to 2020 which provide the basis for statutory consultation on the Plan.

2. Recommendations

2.1 That the 'Preferred Option' consultation paper for the Hampshire Minerals Plan - part of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework - be commended to the County Council for approval, along with background technical evidence, as a basis for consultation in accordance with Regulation 26 of The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004.

2.2 That the County Council be further recommended to authorise, the Director of Environment, in consultation with the Executive Member for Environment, to make appropriate amendments and updates where required to the 'Preferred Option' consultation paper before it is finally published, provided that these do not change the overall direction, shape and emphasis of the document, and do not raise any significant new issues.

3. Background

3.1 The County Council, in partnership with Portsmouth and Southampton City Councils and the New Forest National Park Authority, previously approved Minerals and Waste Development Schemes for preparing a number of 'development documents' that will comprise a Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework.

3.2 Under the Development Scheme the County Council has already published a Statement of Community Involvement that sets out how the County Council will engage with the community and other interests over the preparation of mineral and waste planning policy and planning applications. The County Council has also adopted - on 12 July 2007 - the Minerals and Waste Core Strategy that sets out 'over-arching' requirements for the future planning of minerals and waste in Hampshire until 2020. The Core Strategy requirements were developed following a three year stakeholder consultation process.

3.3 The next 'development document' under the Scheme is the Hampshire Minerals Plan, which will deliver the requirements set out in the adopted Core Strategy. Key requirements of the Core Strategy - updated as appropriate to reflect the latest data - include:

3.4 These requirements will need to be met from a combination of existing sites and 'new' proposals, where possible, looking to expand existing operations, ahead of using industrial/employment land or considering new locations.

3.5 The Core Strategy also requires the identification of:

4. Site Selection Methodology

4.1 A robust site selection process - meeting statutory obligations for Sustainability Appraisal and Consultation - as set out in the Core Strategy, has been used to select the proposals presented in the Preferred Options consultation paper. This included evaluation of 110 potential new sites using 17 environmental and sustainability factors to identify the 'least worst' sites. The majority of proposals have been eliminated by this process.

4.2 Sustainability Appraisal includes Strategic Environmental Assessment and Habitats Assessment which are required by EU Directives and Strategic Flood Risk Assessment which is required by national planning guidance.

4.3 The site selection process is ongoing throughout the plan-making process and the proposals included in the consultation paper should be considered to reflect the 'direction of travel' based on the best knowledge available at this time. It is likely - and indeed it is one of the purposes of this consultation stage - that new proposals or information will come to light which may change the final approach.

4.4 As part of the preparation of this document the County Council, along with its partners, has carried out an informal 'issues and options' stakeholder engagement exercise with various public, business and environmental interests over the last year. This consultation included a number of local meetings and the publication of potential locations for quarries, landfills and aggregate recycling sites.

4.5 Just under 7,000 representations were received in response to the issues and options consultation of which approximately 4,000 related to sand and gravel proposals at Roeshot Hill and Walkford and Beckley Farms - both of which are off the A35 on the edge of the Forest area near the border with Christchurch Borough. A local pressure group was set up following publication of the Core Strategy and these letters represent a continuation of their campaign against quarries or landfill proposals at these two sites.

4.6 The majority of responses were generic in nature identifying concerns about transport (congestion, road safety and impact from heavy goods vehicles - HGVs), natural environment (impact on habitats, wildlife and landscape), amenity (concerns about noise, dust, vermin and potential impact on health) and to a slightly lesser extent impact on property (proximity to residential areas, effect on property prices and damage from vibration).

4.7 These generic concerns are covered by the sustainability appraisal process and the 17 environmental and sustainability factors set out in the Core Strategy.

4.8 Sustainability Appraisal has been used to 'thin' a long list of nominated proposals into a number of reasonable options - the majority of which have been taken forward into the consultation document as 'preferred options' due to the need to fulfil requirements. Sustainability Appraisal includes a subjective evaluation of suitability compared to other similar types of development, and also including consideration of cumulative impacts where proposals may be clustered together.

4.9 Each proposal has been evaluated against 17 sustainability factors which are detailed in the Core Strategy. No proposal will be perfect - the aim of Sustainability Appraisal is to avoid unacceptable development and direct development to the 'least worst' locations, to identify environmental mitigation measures and to ensure unacceptable cumulative impacts are avoided.

4.10 With the exception of Busta Triangle (part of the Eversley Common Quarry Extension proposed preferred area) no new 'preferred' options are suggested within internationally or nationally designated areas, such as national parks or European habitat sites. Busta Triangle has been included as a preferred option at this stage - despite being located within the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA) - because the site was subject to a previous planning application; there is an appeal pending. Proposals for low-level heathland restoration would improve the existing habitat which is coniferous woodland and Natural England did not object to the application. Similarly, although the potential extension to Kingsley Quarry - which is within the proposed South Downs National Park - is not identified as a preferred site it is in many ways a better site than the nearby proposal at Malthouse and Osbornes Farms.

4.11 Appraisals have also been undertaken to ensure that proposals near to European habitats sites and the New Forest National Park will not have an adversely significant effect upon them. Indeed in many cases such appraisals result in suggestions for restoration that would complement the nearby designated site - for example providing public access outside a National Park reduces the recreation pressure within the Park.

4.12 Transport is a principal concern of the majority of public consultees. The Sustainability Appraisal process takes this on board through evaluation of individual proposals using several of the environmental and sustainability factors, as well as 'broader' consideration of the transport implications in the key mineral producing areas. Such considerations are a little artificial because - by virtue of the fact that provision is being made for a supply rate that evidently exceeds current demand - they inevitably look at an unrealistic worst case scenario. In addition, advice on transport issues has been sought from neighbouring authorities where mineral producing areas supply markets outside Hampshire, and from the Highways Agency about potential impact on the Strategic Road Network.

4.13 The outcome is that existing operations are acceptable and that future operations should, where possible, be phased to replace existing operations when these close. There are concerns about 'new' proposals in the Hamble peninsula, which does not have any currently operational sites, and the effect this may have on already congested roads.

4.14 Both Surrey County Council and the Highways Agency would be concerned if proposals in the Bordon area were likely to lead to increased movements into Surrey either through Wrecclesham or along the A3.

4.15 In the Forest area much of the production supplies the Bournemouth market, and both Dorset County Council and Christchurch Borough Council prefer production north of Ringwood as opposed to production in the coastal belt south of Ringwood between Lymington and Christchurch. Proposals which would use the A337 through Highcliffe are least favoured, although there is history of local production in the Pennington/New Milton area. However, there are also concerns about the impact of proposals north of Ringwood on the A31 and its junctions and a transport study was commissioned to examine this.

4.16 It is inevitable that a more detailed 'strategic transport assessment' will need to be completed prior to finalising the Hampshire Minerals Plan.

4.17 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment has also been carried out as part of the Sustainability Appraisal process. However, since national planning guidance permits most types of mineral activity in the flood plain, this assessment has had little impact on the final proposals. No new landfill sites or 'strategic' aggregate recycling facilities are located in the flood plain.

5. Principal Issues and Preferred Options

5.1 For the period to 2016, land-won sand and gravel will be supplied from existing sites with planning permission and a number of proposed 'preferred areas' which are principally, but not exclusively, focussed on key mineral producing areas at Bramshill, Bordon, Hamble peninsula, north of Ringwood and along the coastal belt between Lymington and Christchurch.

5.2 These preferred areas are:

5.3 The consultation document also sets out a number of alternative locations, with preferences, and invites public comment on these. For example: Malthouse and Osbornes Farms are preferable to an extension of the existing Kingsley Quarry, purely because the latter is within the proposed South Downs National Park. In many ways if it were not for the proposed National Park this would be preferable. Such dilemmas are raised to invite comment.

5.4 Overall these proposals are just capable of supplying sand and gravel to meet the sub-regional apportionment rate of 2.63 million tonnes a year. However, there are insufficient suitable proposals - taking account of the need to avoid unacceptable cumulative and transport impacts in Bordon, and to the west of Romsey - in the Downland area to meet their locally apportioned supply rates and indicative total requirements. This shortfall has been made up by proposals in the North East Hampshire and South Hampshire areas, however these are not entirely satisfactory.

5.5 Because many of the proposed preferred areas - particularly in the Forest area - will continue operation during the Strategic Reserve period 2017-2020, the requirement for Areas of Search is reduced and indeed is not necessary in the Forest area. A methodology for identifying areas of search is proposed along with a release mechanism to help with determining planning applications.

5.6 Landfill capacity will be provided predominantly by existing sites with planning permissions, and extensions, and the following additional preferred areas on proposed or old unsatisfactorily restored mineral sites:

5.7 Alternative proposals have been rejected for a number of reasons, including risk to groundwater, cumulative impact and requirements being met.

5.8 Recycled and secondary aggregates will be provided predominantly by existing 'strategic' sites with planning permission and the following additional preferred sites:

6. Consultation Arrangements

6.1 The consultation will take place over a period of six weeks starting in October 2007. Subsequently, a report will be made on the public comments that will feed into the preparation of the Hampshire Minerals Plan. The final draft of the Hampshire Minerals Plan will then be submitted to the respective Planning Authorities for approval, followed by submission to Government in October 2008. Following submission to the Government the plan will be subject to a Public Examination (probably in the autumn of 2009), and any changes recommended by the Inspector will require a further revision of the Plan (the Modifications Stage). From October 2008 onwards the 'submitted' Hampshire Minerals Plan will be official policy of the Council's and used for determining planning applications and other decisions related to the development and use of land for minerals activities, until superseded by any Modifications to the Plan.

7. Conclusions

7.1 The preferred options proposals have been developed through robust consultation and appraisal processes and represent the latest thinking on potential future minerals sites. In a number of cases where options are not clear cut or where alternatives exist these have been presented for comment.

7.2 The Preferred Option consultation paper on the Hampshire Minerals Plan does not commit the County Council to any policy position or preferences at this stage. Accordingly it is recommended that the document be approved for the purpose outlined.

7.3 The consultation paper will put before the public some substantive proposals on which the County Council will need eventually to make a decision. Although the County Council may have a predisposition to some of these, it is only fair that all interests are given a chance to make comments. Also, until all the information is available - especially from the conclusions of the various appraisals that are ongoing throughout the process, and which the County Council is statutorily required to take into account - the County Council will need to keep an open mind.

LINK(S) TO CORPORATE STRATEGY

Yes

No

Hampshire safer and more secure for all

Maximising well-being

_

Enhancing our quality of place

_

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB the list excludes:

1.

Published works.

2.

Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE

LOCATION

'Preferred Option' Consultation Paper

Environment Department

Room 130

1436Rpt/JS