Issue - meetings

To consider a report of the Director of Economy, Transport and Environment regarding Variation of Condition 1 of Planning Permission 30633/034 to extend the time period of extraction to 31 December 2022 and completion of restoration within a further period of 2 years at Grunden Sand and Gravel Ltd., Frith End Sand Quarry, Frith End, Bordon (Application No. 30633/038) (Site Ref:EH121).

Variation of condition 1 of Planning Permission 30633/034 to extend the time period of extraction to 31 December 2022 and completion of restoration within a further period of 2 years at Grundon Sand and Gravel Ltd Frith End Sand Quarry, Frith End, Bordon GU35 0QR (No. 30633/038) (Site Ref: EH121)

The Committee received a report from the Head of Strategic Planning (item 7 in the minute book) regarding an extension of time for works at a quarry at Frith End in Bordon.

The officer introduced the item, showing the Committee aerial photos and footage from the site. On a plan of the site it was indicated which areas had been processed and were due for restoration along with those that still needed to be extracted. It was anticipated that there was approximately 120,000tonnes of mineral still remaining. Flooding that had occurred following a burst riverbank and issues around Covid had meant that that more time was now required to complete the work on site and an extension to time was being sought.

The Committee received three deputations on this item. Brian Davey addressed the Committee as a local resident and had concerns over planning creep on site and felt that the extension of time was longer than what should be necessary for a 10 month delay. There was also fear that approval of the extension would lead on to further requests and expansion.

Stewart Mitchell addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant to reassure that the request was only to assist with the delays to existing work and the site was crucial for providing mineral for Hampshire.

Councillor Mark Kemp-Gee spoke as the local Member and thanked Grundons for the liaison panel that had proved successful and well managed, and also for their support of the local Kingsley Centre, which had continued throughout lockdown. Cllr Kemp-Gee also confirmed that the site had flooded before and shared residents concerns that a two year extension seemed a long time.

During questions of the officers, the following points were clarified:

·         The extraction at the site included both soft and silica sand

·         Future development had not been proposed and was irrelevant to the application being sought in any case

·         The flooding of the river had not been caused by the quarry

During debate, Members agreed that the flooding on site was something that would need to be addressed by the Environment Agency and that the application should only be able to complete the works previously sought for in the original permission.

It was confirmed that an update report had been circulated, which summarised updates from County Ecology, the Flood Risk permit and representations.

RESOLVED:

Planning permission was granted subject to the update report and conditions listed in Appendix A.

Voting:
Favour: 16 (unanimous)