Contact: Julia Davey, ext 6732 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report considers an application for the retention of the concrete batching plant and associated hardstandings at Ringwood Quarry, Ibsley for a further period until 31 March 2007.

1.2 The recommendation is to grant approval subject to conditions.

2. Site and Proposal

2.1 The site extends across approximately 1 hectare of land within the existing Ringwood quarry site at Ibsley. Apart from the batching plant and associated access and hardstandings the quarry is now almost completely restored to open water, water storage and nature conservation.

2.2 The site lies immediately adjacent to and south of the Ibsley Water and Mockbeggar Lakes SSSI and Ramsar site. It is accessed from Ellingham Drove which directly links with the A338 Ringwood-Salisbury Road to the west. The nearest houses to the north are approximately 850 metres away beyond Ibsley Water along Mockbeggar Lane and to the east approximately 830 metres away at Moyles Court. During the last 12 months the applicant has restored the areas either side of the concrete batching plant in accordance with the planning permission.

2.3 Gravel extraction ceased at the quarry in December 2003 but the concrete batching plant has continued to operate following an extension of time granted to allow the plant to remain on the site until 31 July 2006 (85529). This extension of time was granted because the applicant was proposing to relocate the plant to a newly permitted sand and gravel quarry in Hurn, Dorset.

2.4 A further extension of time is now being sought because the quarry development at Hurn has been delayed and is not now expected to be fully operational until the first quarter of 2007. Delays at Hurn have been caused by the need to divert a high pressure gas pipeline which links with the nearby airport before the applicant was able to start construction of the site access. Moreover, the sand and gravel plant proposed for Hurn is still being built in Ireland before being transported over to the site in the early Autumn of this year.

2.5 The applicant states that following arrival of the new plant at Hurn, there will be at least three months or more whilst the plant is being commissioned. The applicant therefore considers in the circumstances that it needs an extension of time to retain the concrete batching plant on site until 31 March 2007.

3. Development Plan

3.1 Hampshire County Structure Plan (adopted 2000) Policy MW2 refers to the need for the development balanced against any environmental impact it may cause.

3.2 Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (adopted 1998) Policy 6 and 7 refer to environmental impacts of development. Policy 35 refers to minerals manufacturing and processing.

4. Consultations

4.1 Local Member, Councillor Heron, supports the application.

4.2 The Highways Adviser raises no highway objections to the proposal.

4.3 Ellingham Harbridge & Ibsley Parish Council - comments are awaited.

4.4 Environmental Health (New Forest District Council) - no objection

4.5 New Forest District Council - no objection (formal response awaited).

4.6 Environment Agency comments are awaited.

4.7 Civil Aviation - Bournemouth raises no objection to the proposal.

5. Representations

5.1 A petition from seven residents from three separate addresses within the village of Ibsley has been received objecting to the application on the following grounds:

(i) wrong location for such a use;

(ii) noise from plant can be heard at 6.30 am including Saturdays which disturbs residents and wildlife;

(iii) reversing alarms can be heard all day;

(iv) the site is floodlit all night; and

(v) it is understood that mineral to the batching plant will be imported from the excavation at Hurn which indicates the site is gradually becoming permanent.

6. Chief Planning Adviser's Comments

6.1 Under the existing permission the concrete batching plant is due to be removed by the end of July this year. However, it was always understood that the operation would be relocated to the Hurn site in Dorset. The applicant's justification for the extension of time is the delay in developing the Hurn site and problems getting the new plant commissioned.

6.2 The local Member supports the application. However, a number of key consultee responses are awaited including the Environment Agency, the Parish Council, the District Council and the Environmental Health Officer.

6.3 The occupiers of three dwellings in Ibsley have objected to the proposal on amenity grounds: noise from the plant, noise from the reversing bleepers and floodlighting at night. To date no complaints have been received by the County Council from local residents on any of these matters. The comments of the Environmental Health Officer are therefore critical. However, it should be noted that the concrete batching plant is 830 metres from the nearest resident at Moyle's Court and that none of the residents who have objected live at Moyle's Court, but are at a greater distance from the plant.

6.4 The concern raised by local residents about the potential for mineral being imported from Hurn is noted. The applicant has written to the County Council confirming that this will not happen.

6.5 In summary it is considered that in the unusual circumstances surrounding the delay in commissioning the new plant at Hurn, permission for the eight-month extension of time be granted.

Recommendation

That permission for the retention of the concrete batching plant at Ringwood Quarry, Ibsley until 31 March 2007 (Application No 87850) be granted an eight-month extension of time subject to no significant objections being received from the Environmental Health Officer or the Environment Agency.

Reasons for Approval

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan (summary attached) and would not materially harm the character of the area or the amenity of local residents and would be acceptable in terms of highway safety and convenience.

Conditions

Timescale

(1) There shall be no extraction of minerals; all plant, buildings, fences, haul roads, hard standings and machinery associated with the site subject to the ROMP permission 00065190M shall in the case of the area hatched red on drawing 1009r/114 and the concrete batching plant - be removed by 31 March 2007. With restoration five calendar months after the aforementioned dates in accordance with details approved under condition 35 of planning permission 00065190M (ROMP) unless otherwise agreed by the Mineral Planning Authority in writing.

Reason: The development is of a type not considered suitable for permanent retention.

Advice Note

The Environment Agency states that In September 2004 a water abstraction licence was issued to Hanson Quarry Products Ltd for abstraction from a clean water lagoon to supply the concrete manufacturing plant. This licence is due to expire on 31 March 2008. This licence does not authorise abstraction from Ibsley Water.

All other conditions relating to planning permission 00065190M remain valid.

959/JD

Annexe to Reasons for Conditions

(as required by Article 22 of the Town and Country Planning

(General Procedure) Order 1995 - as amended)

__________________________________________________________________

Hampshire County Structure Plan (Review) 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.

Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (Adopted) 1998

Policy 6

Permission will be granted for minerals and waste development provided the Mineral/Waste Planning Authority is satisfied that:

(i) there is a clearly established need for the development (as assessed in relation to the other relevant policies of the Plan) which outweighs any adverse environmental or other impact that the development would be likely to cause; and

(ii) the development would not be likely to give rise to an unacceptable level of adverse environmental, traffic or other impact, pollution risk or danger to public health, particularly in respect of any of the factors specified in Policy 7 and measures would be taken to ensure that any such impacts would, as far as is practicable, be minimised; and

(iii) the proposals provide for the satisfactory working or operation and landscaping of the site and for its satisfactory restoration and landscaping at the cessation of the operations or use or at the end of the life of the facility to a condition suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use which is compatible with adjoining land uses and the planning policies for the area.

Notwithstanding any need there may be for waste disposal, permission will not normally be granted for mineral extraction with restoration by infilling with waste materials unless there is a need for the mineral to be extracted.

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 35

In cases where it is not permitted by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order, the Mineral Planning Authorities will grant planning permission for minerals processing and manufacturing plant and other development ancillary to the extraction, landing or unloading of minerals within the boundaries of, or adjacent to, mineral extraction sites, aggregates wharves and rail-head aggregates depots, provided that:

(i) in the case of processing plant, it is required to process minerals either extracted from the mineral working site, landed at the wharf or delivered by rail to the depot;

(ii) in the case of manufacturing plant, the greater part of the minerals to be used to manufacture the product will be either extracted from the mineral working site, landed at the wharf or delivered by rail to the depot, and the manufacturing activities will remain ancillary to the primary use of the site as a mineral extraction site, aggregates wharf or rail-head aggregates depot;

(iii) in the case of other ancillary development, the development is required solely in connection with the administration or servicing of the mineral working site, wharf or depot;

(iv) the plant or other development is to be designed, constructed and landscaped so as to minimise any adverse impact on the amenities of the area and, in any case, it would not be likely to give rise to any unacceptable environmental, traffic or other impact;

(v) the size, type and nature of the plant or other development are appropriate to the scale of the mineral extraction site, aggregates wharf or rail-head aggregates depot for which it is required; and

(vi) the plant, structure or building would be removed as soon as extraction of minerals from the mineral working site has permanently ceased or the use of the aggregates wharf or rail-head aggregates depot has ceased and the site would be restored to a satisfactory condition suitable for an agreed beneficial after-use.

Where permission is granted for minerals processing or manufacturing plant at or adjacent to a mineral extraction site, this will be subject to conditions preventing the importation of material from elsewhere, with the exception of material that is necessary for the operation of the plant but is not, or was not formerly, extracted from the mineral extraction site.