Contact: Peter Chadwick, ext. 6728 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 Planning permission is sought for gravel extraction, followed by restoration by infilling with inert waste, at Lower Farm, Pennington. This would be operated as an extension to the current workings at Manor Farm / Efford. The recommendation is to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

2. Site and proposal

2.1 The site, as shown on the attached plan, comprises an area of nine hectares of farmland, within which 6.65 hectares would be extracted for sand and gravel. The site is to the east of, and adjoining, the current Manor Farm workings, and is within the South Hampshire Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and within the proposed New Forest National Park. The site is north of the marshes which are of European importance for nature conservation, being part of Solent and Southampton Water SPA and RAMSAR, Hurst Castle and Lymington River Estuary SSSI, Solent and Isle of Wight Lagoons cSAC and Solent Maritime cSAC. The nearest houses are along Lower Pennington Lane, to the east of the site. The closest house is about 30 metres from the edge of the site, but about 100 metres from the extraction area.

2.2 The proposal is to extract about 310,000 tonnes of sand and gravel with progressive restoration to agriculture through inert waste tipping. The working would be in two phases, the southern half being worked first. Each phase would take about two years to extract and three years to infill and restore. Infilling would be progressive so that Phase 1 would be substantially infilled before extraction commences in Phase 2. The infilling would be with inert waste, including soils, clays, and material from construction and development sites and road improvements. The capacity of the site would be about 200,000 cubic metres. Mineral extraction in each phase would take two years. The infilling and restoration is anticipated to take three years for each phase. Following the removal of topsoil and subsoil, the mineral would be worked by hydraulic excavator. The soils would be stored in bunds on the eastern perimeter to provide noise barriers. The bunding would be continuous.

2.3 The mineral would be taken by haul road to the Manor Farm Site. All access would be to the A337 (Milford Road) via the existing access. There would be no access onto Lower Pennington Lane. There would be no increase in daily lorry movements to and from the A337, although the period of the operation would be extended.

2.4 The site would be restored to agriculture, the landform similar to other areas within Manor Farm which have been restored by the applicant. In addition there would be additional hedgerow planting, as well as retention of existing perimeter hedgerows.

2.5 The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES), accompanied by a Non-Technical Summary. The Environmental Statement covers geology, hydrology, landscape, ecology, archaeology, agriculture and soils, traffic and transportation, noise, dust and impact on humans.

2.6 During the course of the application the proposals were amended to ensure that bunding was continuous so as to improve the efficiency as an acoustic barrier. Further monitoring, investigation and information was provided with regards to hydrology and drainage in order to assess any potential impacts for the nearby European nature conservation sites.

3. Development Plan

3.1 Hampshire County Structure Plan Review 1996 - 2001 (Adopted March 2000) policies MW2 and MW3 apply.

3.2 Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (Adopted December 1998) Policies 7 and 8 concern proposals for mineral extraction and waste disposal, and Policy 20 concerns small scale extensions to existing sites.

4. Consultations

4.1 New Forest District Council raises an objection on the grounds that the proposals would adversely affect the appearance of the AONB, and that bringing workings closer to local residents would increase the nuisance of noise and dust.

4.2 Lymington and Pennington Town Council recommends refusal on the following grounds:

(i) the proposal is contrary to Policies 7 and 8 of the Hampshire Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan, in that there would be unacceptable noise and dust for local residents (including Oakhaven Hospice);

(ii) adverse impact for animal species including Barn Owls; the ditch would take more fresh water down to the marshes, reducing salinity further;

(iii) the site is within an AONB and so should not be worked; and

(iv) at nine hectares it is not a small extension.

4.3 Milford-on-Sea Parish Council have no comments.

4.4 The Highways Adviser raises no objection.

4.5 The Environment Agency raises no objection subject to conditions to protect the water environment.

4.6 The Environmental Health Officer (NFDC), following amendments to the proposals to extend perimeter bunding, raises no objection subject to conditions to control noise.

4.7 English Nature were concerned about the impact on the flows in the Lower Pennington Stream, which leads to the marshes, being part of Solent and Southampton Water SPA/RAMSAR site. On receipt of further information it was established that, if there were any flows, they would be extremely small, and therefore would not have a likely significant effect on the international site. Consequently English Nature have withdrawn their objection.

4.8 Hampshire Wildlife Trust comments that the site itself is of low ecological value, and is satisfied that ecological features would be retained, although it adds that as the site is within the proposed New Forest National Park, the tests for mineral extraction in National Parks should apply.

4.9 The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) has serious concerns with regards to the potential impacts of the application on sites of European and national importance for wildlife.

4.10 The Council for National Parks raises an objection and urges refusal on grounds that:

(i) it fails the tests set out for mineral working in National Parks and AONBs;

(ii) it would cause demonstrable harm to the proposed New Forest National Park as the designation is a material consideration in planning terms; and

(iii) it is a departure from the Development Plan and no compelling reasons have been provided as to why this departure should be allowed.

4.11 County Councillors Rice and Hayes have been informed.

5. Representations

5.1 Letters of objection have been received from seven local residents on the grounds of the following:

(i) the proposal is contrary to the Development Plan;

(ii) unacceptable noise, dust and air pollution;

(iii) the development would lower property values;

(iv) adverse impact on local amenity of attractive country area;

(v) surface water drainage affecting ditches along Lower Pennington Lane / disruption to natural drainage;

(vi) unacceptable development in a highly protected area; and

(vii) unacceptable impact on an AONB, proposed National Park and sites of importance to nature conservation.

5.2 A letter of objection has also been received from Cluttons, acting on behalf of a group of residents, which is accompanied by a report from a noise consultant, the objection being on the following grounds:

(i) the proposal is contrary to the policies of Hampshire County Structure Plan; Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan, and the New Forest District Local Plan;

(ii) the site is too close to housing, with an unacceptable impact on the lives of local residents;

(iii) there is concern that the estimated period for restoration cannot be relied upon;

(iv) redirecting surface water from the site will not assist in reducing flooding in Lower Pennington Lane; and

(v) concern over the impact on the area with its nature designations.

The accompanying noise report states that there would be an unacceptable impact on local residents, and points out errors and omissions in the noise appraisal submitted with the application.

6. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

6.1 The proposed mineral extraction from Lower Farm is a departure from the Development Plan in that the site is not a Preferred Area in the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan and, although an extension to an existing site, it is too large to be regarded as a small scale extension under Policy 20. It is also located within the AONB and proposed National Park. Therefore the issue is whether the there are special circumstances to justify a departure in Policy and whether the proposals are environmentally acceptable.

6.2 The need for sand and gravel is significant in considering such special circumstances. The requirement is for the maintenance of a seven year landbank of sand and gravel reserves with planning permissions, in order to ensure the continuity of supply of aggregates for development. The current position is that there is only a County Landbank of about five years. There is therefore a strong need argument for releasing further permissions. Sites which are extensions to existing operations are, in principle, preferable because the infrastructure, such as access to the road network, already exists. However even with this need, the proposal has to be environmentally acceptable, and even more rigorous tests have to be applied given that the site is within an AONB and proposed National Park, and near conservation areas of international importance.

6.3 Particular concern was raised with this application because of potential impact for the nearby marshes, which have European nature conservation designations. Extensive further work was undertaken by the applicant in response to these concerns. As a result the Environment Agency and English Nature are satisfied that the working of this site would have no significant impact for these important sites because any water flows from the site to the ditches leading to the marshes would be insignificant.

6.4 Substantial objection has been raised from local residents on Lower Pennington Lane on the grounds of unacceptable impacts from noise, dust and disturbance from the proposed operations. The application has been amended to improve the acoustic barriers around the site. Notwithstanding the comments by the noise consultant in objection to this application, it is considered that the noise generated would be within appropriate standards. The New Forest District Environmental Health Officer concurs with this view. Suitable conditions can ensure satisfactory noise and dust standards are met. There is no proposed access onto Lower Pennington Lane, therefore lorry traffic would not affect these residents.

6.5 The site is located within the AONB and proposed National Park, and there will be a visual impact during the site's operation. However the proposals provide for the satisfactory restoration of the site to a landform which is appropriate. The applicant has demonstrated the ability to restore land in an appropriate manner elsewhere on the Manor Farm site, and it is not considered that the proposals would be detrimental to the AONB in the longer term.

6.6 Concerns have been raised regarding the duration of these operations, and whether the timescales will be complied with, bearing in mind delays in the infilling and restoration of previous working areas. It is considered that the timescales should relate to those applicable for the nearby Efford site; consequently it is recommended that any permission be conditioned to require the completion of mineral extraction, infilling and restoration by

30 June 2008. This would require the completion of the site earlier than

proposed by the applicant, but it is considered important to complete this proposal within the same timescale as the adjoining working at Efford and Manor Farm.

6.7 It is considered that there is a significant need for the sand and gravel, and consequently for the infilling to secure satisfactory restoration, which justifies a departure from Development Plan Policy. The impact for the nearby marshes would be insignificant. Whilst there clearly will be some disturbance for local residents, this will be within accepted standards and controlled through appropriate conditions. Therefore on balance it is considered that the application should be permitted.

Recommendation

That planning permission in respect of Extension of mineral extraction infilling with waste and restoration to agriculture at Lower Farm, Pennington (Application No 74405) be granted permission subject to the following conditions:

Time Limit

(1) The excavation of sand and gravel and subsequent infilling shall be completed by 31 December 2007, and the site restored by 30 June 2008. The restoration shall include removal of all plant, machinery, stockpiles and haul roads.

Reason: The development is for mining operations unsuitable for permanent permission.

Working Programme

(2) There shall be no mineral extraction within 100 metres of any house.

Reason: To protect the amenity of local residents.

(3) The working, including phasing, extent of extraction, ancillary engineering works and drainage facilities, restoration and after care of the site, shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To enable the Mineral Planning Authority to adequately control the development and to minimise its impact on the amenities of the local area.

(4) The Mineral Planning Authority shall be informed in writing seven days in advance of the date of commencement of development in Phase 1 and the commencement of development within Phase 2.

Reason: In order to monitor commencement of development.

Restriction of Permitted Development Rights

(5) 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):

(i) fixed plant or machinery, buildings, structures and erections, or private ways shall not be erected, extended installed or replaced at the site without the prior agreement of the Mineral Planning Authority; and

(ii) lights or fences shall not be installed or erected at the site unless details of them have been submitted an agreed by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the area.

Hours of Working

(6) No operations shall be carried out at the site except between the hours of 0700 and 1800 hours Monday to Friday and 0700 and 1300 hours on Saturday. No operations shall take place on Sunday or public holidays unless otherwise agreed by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the amenities of local residents.

Noise and Dust

(7) Prior to development commencing, an Environmental Management Scheme specifying measures to control and monitor noise and dust emissions shall be submitted to the Mineral Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall be implemented as approved for the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

(8) Noise from the operation of the site, other than during the construction and removal of soil bunds, shall not exceed 47 dB Laeq (1 hour) as measured at point R1 on figure 2/2155. During construction and removal of soil bunds, noise shall not exceed 70 dB Laeq (1 hour) as measured at point R1 on figure 2/2155.

Reason: In the interest of local amenity.

Water Protection

(9) Prior to mineral extraction commencing, a Water Management Scheme shall be submitted to the Mineral Planning Authority. The Scheme shall provide for the management of water flows at the site (including both surface water run-off and groundwater flows) and contain arrangements for monitoring for the duration of mineral extraction, landfill, restoration and aftercare. The scheme shall be implemented as approved for the duration of the development.

Reason: To minimise flooding and prevent pollution of the water environment.

(10) Any facilities for the storage of fuels shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The bund capacity shall give 110% of the total volume for single and hydraulically linked tanks. If there is multiple tankage, the bund capacity shall be 110% of the largest tank or 25% of the total capacity of all tanks, whichever is the greatest. All filling, points, vents, gauges and sight glasses and overflow pipes shall be located within the bund. There shall be no outlet connecting the bund to any drain, sewer or watercourse or discharging onto the ground. Associated pipework shall be located above ground where possible and protected from accidental damage.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment.

Archaeology

(11) The requirements of the approved written scheme of investigation shall be fully implemented for the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of archaeology.

Access

(12) There shall be no access to the site via Lower Pennington Lane or Iley Lane.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

Landscaping

(13) All trees and shrubs planted in accordance with the approved scheme as shown on drawing P10.L/13 shall be maintained for a period of 5 years from planting. Any that die, are removed, are seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of local amenity.

(14) No development, including extraction, tipping, soil storage and vehicle movement and parking shall take place within the crown spread of any trees or hedgerow shown to be retained on drawing P10.L/13. Prior to development commencing, details of measures to protect retained trees and hedgerows shall be submitted to the Mineral Planning Authority for approval in writing, and implemented as approved.

Reason: In order to protect trees and hedgerows to be retained.

Restoration

(15) The site shall be restored to agriculture in accordance with the details submitted with the application, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to ensure satisfactory restoration.

After-care

(16) An after-care scheme specifying the steps required to bring each phase of the land to the required standard for agriculture shall be submitted to the Mineral Planning Authority for approval in writing within 12 months of the commencement of mineral extraction. The scheme shall be implemented as approved for a period of five years from the completion of restoration of each phase.

Reason: In order to ensure satisfactory restoration.

8145/PDC

APPENDIX

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY STRUCTURE PLAN 1996-2011 (REVIEW) (ADOPTED MARCH 2000)

Policy MW2

Permission will be granted for minerals and waste development provided the mineral/waste planning authority is satisfied that:

(i) any adverse environmental or other impacts that the development would be likely to cause are outweighed by a clearly established need for the development; and

(ii) the proposals, where applicable, include a satisfactory scheme of working and landscaping including details of lorry routeing and, in all cases, include satisfactory measures to ensure that the development would not have any unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact; and

(iii) the proposals, where applicable, provide for the satisfactory and prompt restoration and after-care of the site to a high standard and to a landform compatible with the local landscape and suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.

Policy MW3

Permission will not be granted for minerals and waste development which is likely to cause material harm to any of the following designated areas and sites:

The New Forest;

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty;

Special Areas of Conservation;

Special Protection Areas;

Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Sites);

Sites of Special Scientific Interest;

National Nature Reserves;

Nationally important archaeological sites and monuments, whether scheduled or not, and their settings;

Conservation Areas;

Listed Buildings; and

Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest on English Heritage's National Register;

except where the Mineral/Waste Planning Authority considers that there is an overriding need for the development to take place in the public interest which outweighs the harm that would be caused, having regard to the level of protection given to the designation concerned in legislation or government guidance.

HAMPSHIRE, PORTSMOUTH AND SOUTHAMPTON MINERALS AND WASTE LOCAL PLAN (ADOPTED 17 DECEMBER 1998)

Policy 7

The Mineral and Waste Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for minerals and waste development provided they are satisfied that, where appropriate, the proposed development pays due regard to:

(i) the relationship of the proposal site to other properties and land uses (particularly residential and other environmentally sensitive properties) and the likely effects of the proposed development on the locality by reason of noise, dust, smoke, fumes, illumination or any other factor and the need for buffer zones between the development and residential and other properties;

(ii) the likely volume and nature of traffic that would be generated by the proposed development and the suitability of the proposed access to the site and of the road network that would be affected, in terms of highway capacity and safety and environmental impact, and whether any highway improvements required could be carried out satisfactorily without causing unacceptable environmental impact;

(iii) the likely visual impact of the proposed development and the need for additional planting and screening, including planting in advance of the commencement of the development;

(iv) the need to safeguard the character and amenities of individual settlements and to safeguard open gaps between settlements from permanent development which would cause long-term harm to the function of the land;

(v) the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to protect and safeguard sites of nature conservation, geological, archaeological, historic, architectural and landscape importance and their settings;

(vi) the extent and quality of agricultural land to be taken by the proposed development and the proposals for its subsequent restoration and the likely effects of the proposals on farm structure and management;

(vii) the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to maintain the distinctive character of the landscape; the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to safeguard and protect individual species, habitats and landscape features, including woodland, trees and hedgerows; and the likely effects of the proposed development on forestry and woodland management;

(viii) the likely effects of the proposed development on sites used for recreation and public rights of way and the need to protect or secure the satisfactory diversion of public rights of way;

(ix) the likely effects of the proposed development on and the need to safeguard the flow and quality of watercourses, water supplies, floodplains, groundwater, the drainage of the site and adjoining land and the level of the water table in the locality and the likely effects of the proposed development on the immediate setting of any river;

(x) any potential danger to aircraft from birds being attracted to the site;

(xi) the possible amenity implications of any landfill gas that might be generated at the site and of any provisions that might need to be made to deal with it; and

(xii) the likely cumulative impact of the proposed development in combination with any other significant development taking place or permitted to take place in the locality and the need to minimise the impact of mineral extraction and waste disposal operations by securing, where appropriate, the phased release of sites and progression of working and restoration.

Policy 8

Applications for planning permission for minerals or waste development in the following areas will not be granted save when the development would not prejudice the purpose of the designation and where there is an overriding need for the development to take place in the public interest:

(i) the New Forest Heritage Area;

(ii) Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty;

(iii) National Nature Reserves, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation and Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Sites);

(iv) Scheduled Ancient Monuments and their settings;

(v) Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings, and sites on the National Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest.

Policy 20

The Mineral Planning Authorities will not grant planning permission for the extraction of sand and gravel from land outside the preferred areas specified in Policy 19 unless they are satisfied that the proposal is in conformity with the other policies of the Plan and that:

either:

(i) (a) there is a need for additional permitted reserves of sand and gravel (as assessed against Policies 16-18) which cannot reasonably be met from within the preferred areas; and

(b) it can be demonstrated that working of such land would be equally acceptable to working within a preferred area;

or:

(ii) the proposed development involves a small scale extension to or deepening of an existing active sand and gravel extraction site.