Agenda item

Phased mineral extraction, including ancillary activities, with restoration to agriculture (AMENDED JAN 2019)

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendation and changes in the addendum.

Phased mineral extraction, including ancillary activities, with restoration to agriculture (AMENDED JAN 2019).

Officers provided an overview of the application, highlighted the addendum and made a recommendation for approval.

A petitioner spoke in objection of the application and expressed concerns regarding the location of the site, the impact on the Green Belt and air quality. It was noted that added HGV movement would be unsuitable as it would operate during rush hour increasing traffic and noise congestion, and potentially impacting residents’ health.  It was submitted that, if the application were to be approved, this would go against all the work done against the Heathrow expansion. It was further submitted that the site would never be restored to agricultural land and this work was “Heathrow expansion by the back door”. The petitioner requested that the application be refused.

Responding to questions from the Committee, it was confirmed that the site had previously been used for agricultural purposes.

Representatives of the application addressed the Committee and provided an overview of the applicant’s work. It was explained that there were very special circumstances that justified this work. It was highlighted that the scheme had been designed in a way to reduce any impact on residents and was independent from any Heathrow expansion proposals. The onsite processing plant would result in a reduction in HGV movement and the proposed development was only temporary which caused no permanent impact on the Green Belt. The concerns from the community were noted and the applicants were happy to regularly communicate with the local parish council and residents association.

During Members questions, it was noted that work of a similar nature, restoring agricultural land, had been completed in other areas of London successfully. Clarification was sought regarding noise protection and it was confirmed that there would be a noise monitoring scheme and an assessment would be carried out regularly by an independent consultant. Further information was provided regarding the treatment of materials and it was noted that there was no financial guarantee offered for reinstatement of the original land. It was also noted that as part of the planning conditions there would be a dust management scheme and further details would be submitted to the planning department for approval.

The Committee noted that access and the footpath would remain in its current location and one point of access in and out of the site was considered acceptable.

Clarification was sought in relation to the hours of operation, in regards to earth works across the development as it was in the close vicinity of residents. Officers confirmed that the condition relating to the hours of operation for the whole of the development could be regulated by conditions.

Members discussed the dimensions of the buildings and officers indicated that the dimensions of the buildings could be conditioned to confirm that they would be no greater than the said plans.

The Committee discussed the strength of the conditions, whether a section 106 agreement was required and whether the conditions were robust enough to ensure that that land would be reinstated to the agricultural land. It was confirmed that the conditions were sufficiently robust and there was no need for a section 106 agreement. The position was strong enough and the suggested amendments to the conditions made them stronger. Concerns of any breaches of planning conditions would be investigated by the Enforcement Team. Further, it was noted that if a section 106 agreement was required, the application would be presented again to Committee for Member consideration.

It was noted that planning permission lay with the land and not the owner and there was no evidence before the Committee to meet the statutory test to ask for a bond.

Members agreed for amendments be made to condition 14 to include all development not only earth work activities in order to safeguard the amenity of the surrounding area and commentary around noise monitoring. Amendments to be made to condition 15 regarding contamination to ensure that it was sufficiently robust and independent. Amendments to be made to condition 18 to explicitly include Grade 1 Agricultural Land and an additional condition to be added regarding dimensions. 

The Committee moved a motion to approve the application, subject to delegated authority to the Head of Planning, Labour Lead and Chairman to agree the wording for the suggested amended conditions and the changes in the addendum. The motion was seconded, and upon being put to a vote, unanimously agreed. 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to delegated authority to the Head of Planning, Labour Lead and Chairman to agree the wording for the suggested conditions and the changes in the addendum