Transcript

[BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, Chair, members, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of Braden and the time that you've spent some of you visiting site today and the surrounding areas. The application before you for consideration entails the consolidation of existing approved quarry operations with the Northern Extension to lead in quarry. The site has operated for decades providing a nationally important mineral deposit with minimum impact on local residents and the surrounding areas. An established suite of approved schemes provide control and monitoring of hydrology, archeology, ecology, blasting, noise and dust. The proposal seeks to secure the continued employment of almost 100 staff on site and those employed as a direct result of the quarrying operations, including landscape contractors, members of the construction industry and local suppliers to name but a few. We will continue our current operations, including the stringent monitoring of environmental impacts such as noise, dust, blasting and water. All results from noise, dust, water and blasting monitoring have fallen below the limits that are currently sat under the existing planning permission. And we will continue in vain to ensure that that remains the same. The proposal is not asking for an increase in HDV movements beyond those that have been operational since 2016. And we do not envisage any change in the current. Sorry, OK, there we go. The proposed restoration scheme of the site will improve, we will see, improve B&J biodiversity net gain benefits of approximately 22.61% and habitat creation with some areas being made accessible to the public with the provision of new footpaths and braid or bridleways, some of which will be delivered in the early stages of the development. This will be married up with an area specifically restored with the local community in mind and offering open space for local events, picnicking, sports days, et cetera, overlooking the picturesque lake. This area offers biodiverse habitats along with orchard trees that are there for the community's use. In addition to this, biodiversity is a considered factor within the daily operations of the quarry. The site specific biodiversity action plan ensures we deliver a variety of initiatives throughout the operational life of the site. We respectfully ask members to support the officer's recommendation and approve this proposal. Thank you. I will open it up to the officers. Do you want to address the issues that have been raised here or does Mark maybe on the highways side of things? Thank you, my presentation, Chair. About five minutes, if that's okay. Thank you. So, Leaton Quarry, if we can just advance the slides at 22nd intervals, please. Located north of the A5, three kilometres east of Wellington, application seeks permission from northerly extension and formation of a landscape screen mound. With the 21 million tonnes of new reserves, which comprises 13.5 million in proposed extension, and 7.8 from proposed deepening of the existing quarry. The applicant breed and group is a leading construction materials supplier. Quarry will continue to develop as a series of 15 metre high faces separated by benches. We saw that this afternoon. Rock released by blasting would be transported to the primary crusher and then to processing plant for further crushing and screening. So, the proposals involved stopping up Leaton Lane. The public right away would be diverted around the eastern edge of the extended workings. And other rights away would be created around the quarry's sites. Surface water settlement ponds would be relocated and the workings would be deepened. Additionally, the current limit on the rate of extraction of 750,000 tonnes would be removed. And a new plant site and stock guard would be formed at a lower level within the quarry workings. Restoration would be to a lake with surrounding Fieldson Woodland. Lake would cover the majority of the benches with shallower habitats being created in the southeast corner. So, the application is supported by an environmental statement and the applicants formally submitted additional information in response to Quarry's raised. So, in terms of policy, the MPPF recognizes that minerals are finite resource and can only be worked where they're found and requires that great weight should be given to the benefits of mineral extraction, including the economy. Local plan policy ER3 sets out circumstances in which an extension to Leaton may be considered. Specifically, the need for minerals should outweigh the material planning objections and working should either prevent the sterilization of the resource and/or offer significant environmental benefits. Policy ER6 sets out the general requirements of working developments in mineral, including the need to protect the environment and local amenities. So, the environmental statement considers the extent to which the criteria for mineral working set out in the policy are met and concludes that there would be no unacceptably adverse impacts after mitigation. In terms of consultations, we've heard Rockwood in Parish have expressed concerns that the proposals would adversely affect the village and its surroundings. Including concerns about the effects on the conservation area in St Peter's Church, concerns about blasting air quality ecology highways, including the closure of Leaton Lane. There have been 82 public representations. This includes 74 objections, six in support and two advocating the need for improved footpath provision. There are no outstanding objections from technical consultees, including Shropshire Council, the Environment Agency, and the Council's Ecology's Highways Drainage and Heritage Services. We're fortunate to have the highway officer to give further detail. So, some consultees have recommended detailed planning conditions in the event of permission. So, in terms of needs, the MPPF recognises mineral planning authorities should make appropriate provision for future aggregate demand by defining land banks of permitted reserves. The Shropshire, Talton and Reakin sub-region has reserves of crushed rock significantly above the required land bank level. However, this is a minimum figure and individual proposals must be considered on their merits. The Shropshire local aggregate assessment confirms that Leaton supplies over 25% of all crushed rock sales in the West Midlands region. Additionally, the mineral at Leaton is classified as high specification aggregate due to its high resistance to polishing, which makes it ideal for primary road networks such as motorway junctions where resistance to skidding is critical. Only a limited number of queries in the UK are capable of supplying high specification aggregate, and this makes Leaton important both regionally and nationally. So, the Africans demonstrate that if the extension is not entered into at this stage, the mineral it contains could well be sterilised. This is because the entrance into the area will be quarried out by working of the current planning consultant. It may not be practical or economic to enter into the extension at a later date. This represents an exceptional circumstance under policy ER3. Given also the absence of objection from technical consultees, it is considered that the criteria for mineral working set out in ER6 are met. Additionally, the proposals would continue to support the direct employment, as we heard, of around 100 personnel and a diverse range of skill sets. So, just going through a couple of the key kind of environmental issues, the Council's heritage service required some alteration to the heritage statement and acknowledged that there would be some less than substantial harm to the setting of the rockwood iron conservation area and listed buildings at Leaton Grange. We saw that there's no direct intervisibility between the site and these heritage assets, but it is sort of nonetheless in relative proximity. So, this needs to be balanced against the public benefits of the proposals in accordance with the test set out in the NPBF, and this includes the local economy benefits of mineral extraction and employment. So, in terms of ecology, whilst the applications submitted before the formal requirement for biodiversity net gain, proposals will still deliver significant net gain, which weighs in favour of the proposals. The applicants also agreed to accept a condition delivering a significant net gain in linear hedgerow habitats as part of progressive restoration. A landscape and visual appraisal finds overall landscape effects are very well contained by woodland and hedgerow vegetation around the site, which we saw this afternoon, though they would be significant localised change at Tiddy Cross House to the north. Parrish has expressed concern the visual effects of the proposed landscape screen mound. However, the mound has been specifically designed to blend sympathetically into the surrounding landform, and there are numerous successful examples of this at other structure quarries. In highway terms, obviously we have Mark here today, the stopping up of Leaton Lane is a separate legal process, not a prerequisite for determination of a current application. Use of the lane has been evidenced as low, and the local highway authority advises that stopping up would not result in severe impact after mitigation in the way meant by the NPBF. Public rights away proposed the immediate north of the extension area, together with other new footpath links, turning areas are proposed. I won't go into that anymore because I think we may hear more from Mark. In terms of amenity, noise dust and blasting reports conclude that the quarry can continue to operate acceptably in relation to these issues, provided existing mitigation measures and conditions continue to apply. So in conclusion, it's considered the applicant and the application has justified the need to enter into the northern extension at this stage in order to prevent sterilization of a proven high quality mineral of resource in accordance with local plan policy ER3. It's considered that the detailed reports accompanying the environmental statement confirmed that the proposals would not give rise to any unacceptable adverse impacts after mitigation. Hence, the criterion for mineral working under ER6 are also met. As such, the proposals are considered to be sustainable and in accordance with the development plan overall, so officers are recommending approval subject to the planning conditions. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Gray. Mark, did you want to come in here and? Yeah, thank you. Is it possible that we could have the highways plan up on the screen again, please? Okay. Members do have copies of this plan as well, but as I'm going to talk through it, I thought it would be good to have them on the screen as well. So there are a number of offsite elements that are being looked at at this site in highway terms, and I'll try and talk you through each of the elements in turn. As has been discussed, Leaton Lane is looking to be stopped up, closed, and then excavated in order to allow the extraction of the mineral below it and also access to the site to the north as well. As a result of that, Leaton Lane is no longer a through route. So if you look on the plan here, we've got 0.1 and 0.2, and these are the mitigation measures that will go in place if the stopping up is approved to ensure that vehicles can turn or make progress and will not just come to a dead end, which would obviously be the case if you have no mitigation there. In inset number one there, you can see if you look at the larger inset that I think might, yep, which is there on the plan that it says site clearance and there's vehicles refus tracking as well. As you can see that there is a turning head proposed to be put in, and that turning head, the geometry of it is to the size of the council's refuse lorry so that it can access the lane, service those properties down there, and then make a full three point turn to then come back out again. On the other end of the lane, you will see at point number two, that there relates to inset number two, which on that planet there you can see number two site clearance, is we're looking at real line in that junction, so that vehicles that are coming from awkward line direction, then go back on themselves, then go back up towards the titty cross direction or also get direction via David's bank. There is then going to be some bollards or some form of restriction then to prevent vehicles from going down the rest of the road up to the stopping up point. There will be a section between where those highway works are taking place at that junction and the stopping up point. Now the reason why that section is not being stocked up is because there are field accesses along there where farmers or landowners do still require access to the fields. So that section will be downgraded to a footway, cycleway and bridleway, but with vehicular access for people who require it, so there will be some bollards there and farmers will have keys to unlock those bollards to be able to take their agricultural equipment down there. Now the reason why that's really important is because we've been very conscious about flight tipping and we did not want a long extension of highway that came to a dead end because it's just asking for trouble. So I think with that solution it is actually a form of betterment in terms of looking at flight, because you haven't got that length or the length that was even there without stopping up order of lead and lane. Then if we move on to Burkhot Lane is that you can see on this plan there which is in sets three, four, five and six are areas that I've identified not widening to the lane, what they are is formalisation of the existing passing places that are on that lane. So most of the passing places on that lane are formed over time just with verge erosion, the not proper passing places as well, over 50, 60, 70, almost 100 years people creeping into the verges more just widen the road and they're in poor condition, they're pothole, they're not surface properly, they're filled with soil. So the plan is on a select number of those, not all of them, a select number of those is to improve the surfacing and just tarmac some and to stone some of the others. And that is just to ensure that the vehicles which are offset which currently use lead and lane which is around about 70 to 80 a day, they will obviously be offset onto Burkhot Lane or submit access into Rockwood Lane. That the road is then fit for purpose is that with those extra traffic on there is that those passing places are fit for purpose. It was important that we didn't go over the top with any mitigations to Burkhot Lane because that road has the potential to be wrapped run through to all script in order to get to the M54 and to the B5061. So it had to be something that was minimal but effective and that's why those works have been proposed. The last element is the B5061 is that we have agreed with the applicant that they will resurface that road in full from their site access up to the junction just to the north of Junction 7 M54. So that work is probably valued at just over half a million pounds and they are going to deliver that. The road at the moment is in an okay condition but we've got to look forward here into that they're going to be operating the site for many, many years more. And with the HGVs on that road we need to ensure that it continues to be fit for purpose and the public interest. So they have got a condition for them to deliver that work. We did give them the option of delivering the work or giving us the council the money to do it but they've decided to do it themselves which is absolutely fine with us. I think in highway terms that is probably everything. There was a point that I think was brought up by the Councillor about the site and the junction which is the Roman Road, Hollyhead Road just to the north of Junction 7 M54. That junction we have been collecting contributions towards a junction improvement scheme there for many years. Alaska has contributed towards it, a site at Haygate Fields in Wellington contributed towards it, even the quarries contributed towards it before in previous applications. The money is building up on that and we're actually at the point now where we're looking at feasibility studies and looking at options to improve that junction there. So we've decided with this application that it was probably best to focus on improving the condition of the B Road rather than looking for more money from them for the junction. Because that is almost looking after itself at the moment. Okay. No? Okay. To the members, first on the list is Councillor Steepently. Thank you, Chair. Just a couple of questions. One to the highway's officer. Is there an alternative proposal should the stopping order not be progressed by the Department of Transport? If the order isn't processed by the Department of Transport, then that means that that road cannot be taken away and therefore it kind of quashes the extension. Right. Okay. That clears that up. In respect to Councillor Thomas' request with regards to Birkut Lane, would a consideration of traffic calming along there be more appropriate than what you were proposing this present moment in time? I think the consideration at the moment of high rail authority is that to an extent, Birkut Lane is self-enforcing. It's quite narrow in places. Forward visibility is limited as well. And I've travelled up and down there many times, and it's not something that you necessarily want to do. We could look at putting traffic calming measures down there, but I'm not 100% sure whether they'd actually be effective in deterring traffic going down there or not. But it is back since all of a site has come into use and residents are living on there. Traffic along Birkut Lane has increased quite considerably. Yes. Yes, it has. And there was an acknowledgement to that probably happening as well, just by the very nature of building that number of houses at all skirts. I think that it's not the responsibility of the quarry necessarily off the back of this application to look at a full scheme of traffic calming down there. The impact of offset traffic from lead and lane is actually very small, and I think we need to be looking at council driven initiatives maybe for something down there, not necessarily off the back of the quarry application. Thank you. You obviously misunderstood me. I wasn't suggesting the quarry should do it. So, one last question for the planning officer. Residents have raised concerns with regards to noise, dust and blasting. In respect to blasting, how long does that actually take when it happens and how often does it happen? The blasting normally takes place once a week. Obviously, the blast itself is a single moment in time, and there's normally a 15-minute warning and a warning before that. It's a normal procedure and an all clear siren afterwards. So in total, you might say that the blast event probably takes half an hour in the space of a week. I'm referring specifically to the noise. Noise again is a one-off. It occurs with the blast. Vibration goes through the ground as a kind of ground vibration. It can go up into the air where it is known as air over pressure. It is monitored together with the ground vibration and the company, every blast is monitored from sometimes from three different locations, I understand. The confirmation is that it's all well within the consented limits, which are significantly below the nationally and internationally recognised limits. The thing about blasting is that people can experience it at a lower level than the level at which it is recognised as being an issue. Because of that, the company recognised that they're constantly striving through feedback to improve their blasting techniques, even though they are very much below the consented limits. So there is a review once they've got the blast monitoring and there are many things that can be changed. They can change the number of holes that are blasted, the maximum instantaneous charge, the depth of the holes and the timing between the blasts. Each hole is triggered off very slightly after all before the next one, and that process can cancel out the waveform so that it reduces it, but you need to get that perfectly right to optimise the amount of suppression. That's an ongoing process, unless you move into a different area of the quarry, the requirements will change, but the company are onto it with a very proactive blast monitoring process. There haven't been ongoing issues with blasting my understanding, they're well within their limits, but they are nonetheless a good neighbour and recognise the need to continue to improve their blasting techniques. Thank you, and again specifically, I was looking at the specific timing, not all the other bits that you outlined. Are we talking here, is it half an hour, once a week, is it a minute? Last event itself will be a single hand clap, basically, it's literally a matter of two seconds. That's what I'm looking for, given what the residents are asking or saying about the blast itself, it's a minimal effect is what you're saying. That's the point. Oh, there is one last thing, sorry, I would like to thank the people from reading today for their hospitality and their very informative tool. Thank you. That's Councillor Nigel Dunmore, please. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Chair. Yeah, I'm glad I went on the site visit. I thoroughly read the report, and I've got quite a few questions, but most of them were answered during the visit, and I fully appreciate the operation that goes on. It's not just digging a few rocks out the ground, and all the work that's been done on this application, particularly in mitigating all of the effects of the proposed increase in activity. I just hope that the increase in activity, which looks like it's going to double, is accommodated by everything that's been proposed. I've just got a couple of queries, one was there's only a single point of discharge for drainage, and is that going to be able to cope with the increase in activity? And also because the proposals for the next 26 years, for any flooding events that might happen, because we certainly saw a bit of a flooding event this afternoon, didn't we really? The other thing is, is Becca Lane, I was concerned about that, but the highway's officer answered the questions about trying to prevent it becoming a rat and raw, but obviously with further developments that's probably going to happen over the next 26 years, you know, sort of as that been factored in. We do need to remember that the quarry has been around for, what, 70 years coming up for. So, you know, sort of, there'll be very few residents that have lived there without there being a quarry there. And so we do need to bear that in mind, but obviously they have got legitimate concerns, and I'll just hope them around when the lakes formed in 26 years. Perhaps you could have an invite from the quarrying. I might need a wheelchair access, though. You probably need a coffin. Thanks very much. I could have a burial at sea, couldn't I? So, yeah, I mean, as I say, I'm quite, quite happy with it, with all the factors that have been mitigated, I'm quite happy to support this. You can just, there we go, respond on the drainage. The site has a discharge consent from the Environment Agency. The amount of water that is arising that needs to be discharged is calculated in the hydrological report. And the capabilities of the drainage system are sized specifically to cater for that. Now, obviously, if you're going deeper and you're going into wider voids, the potential is there for a greater build-up of water. And as we're going below the groundwater level, there's going to be a need for additional pumping, and there's going to be a need for additional discharge. There is a new lagoon, which is being constructed. We saw in the site visits, there was a small one to the north of Leaton Lane at the point where it's just going to be cut off on the Leaton side. They're increasing the capability of the lagoon. It's going on the north-western side of the extension area. So they are upgrading their capabilities specifically. And as I say, it's part of an Environment Agency discharge consent, which is a sort of separate regulatory regime. But they will have to ensure that the capabilities and the buffering capacity within the site is sufficient to avoid the need for, well, to avoid any risk of discharge water affecting other sites. I think we saw today in the base of the quarry void that it is a large sort of natural soaker way, effectively up to points, and some of that water will drain naturally into the quarry floor. But when they go deeper, at that point, the requirements for the new lagoon kicking, and that is, as I say, adequately sized and in accordance with the Environment Agency's specifications. Thank you, Greg. Right. Can I ask Councillor JEMMA-Roflin, please? Thanks, Chair. Much appreciated. Thanks for all the comments. There's just a couple of questions. And obviously, from my perspective, I know, of 36 years of quarrying. So there is a couple of things. It's not just actually the blasting that's a problem. So there's a couple of questions. So what's the hours of operation currently? [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] Sorry about this. So we've found it now, just stealing Andy's laptop. So extraction of stone and processing, Monday's to Friday's 6am until 6pm, and 6am until 1pm on Saturday's coating plants. Monday's to Friday's 5am until 11pm, and Saturday's 5am until 5pm. Dispatch of materials, 5am Mondays to Fridays until midnight, and 5am until 5pm on Saturdays. No working on Sundays or bank holidays. So sorry. Just to clarify, then, there's no crushing past 11 o'clock at night for residents. Yes, extraction and processing. We're looking at 6pm on weekdays and 1pm on Fridays is the limit for the crushing operation. So obviously that should have come into the application because obviously crushing has been going through the night. So from a resident's perspective, obviously that needs looking at from a planning condition on this as a planning authority. So from a resident's point of view, Bick at Row, Bick at Row have always put complaints in around crushing and blasting. That is not a new thing. This has been going on for 36 years. So obviously that will need looking at from that point of view. Conservation and heritage with regards to rapid iron itself, going right down to the dingle and titty cross takes a lot of conservation and heritage from the area. And obviously you've got the issue around dust. So dust obviously dust is a thing called silica that can obviously have an impact on not only people working in it, but obviously outside of it that we need to take into account. And also from the point of view of highways with regards to the road, it's great that they're putting money in. But if the road's not ready yet, okay, and longevity of it, why are we doing it now, potentially, when if say there's 10 years left on the road, so it'd be interesting to know how many years is left on the road as it currently stands. And then actually shouldn't the council actually then have the funds to do the road when it's ready so that we have, if say there's 10 years and we don't do the road now and we do the road in 10 years when it is due to be done with the money that we've got, then you get a further 10 years of usage at the road for longevity because I think we do things too soon sometimes. So obviously looking at that, obviously the end result from decibels with regards to noise, okay, there is only a small amount of noise that can obviously impact hearing. So it's not actually noise, outside noise that you get, it's underground sounds as well that will impact properties that are there and individuals. So it'd be interesting to know actually is the residents that have got hearing impairments actually currently from the underground vibrations that are not heard to sit underneath. So obviously are we looking in further into that, I think from that perspective, but obviously has there also been a group that has potentially been set up to sit down with them 72 residents and say look what does this actually look like. It works really well with residents that I've had down in and what we have groups with businesses every month, and we sit and go through all the issues when it comes to planning and we iron out things. So for example, and I'll use one of the things that from a planning application that we looked at when we've met with businesses is a community garden for the community for residents to enjoy. That has come out of that, which then helps with the bio diversity aspect of it. Thanks, sir. Sorry. It was long. If anybody needs me to clarify anything just that. Yeah, thank you, Jima. Yeah, Mark. Thank you, Mark. Okay, so just with regards to the highways point made and the resurfacing of the B5061. The condition that's been put on is for them is for their quarry to undertake those works within three years of them commencing the consent that they get from the application. We're doing trying to do that because exactly, as you say, cancel off lenders that we don't want them to say they got their consent tomorrow to grant and do it straight away. So our view at the moment is that the road probably needs something to start doing it and say five years time. So at the moment, even though they get their consent, there will be some time to run on this before they actually get out on site and start doing things. They've got to get the order through, there's mobilization. And also the works that we're looking to do of a high quality material. And I would expect that the design life of that road pavement, as we call it, would last between 30 and 40 years. So we'll see the life of the quarry, which we have to remember in planning terms that is what the quarry that the obligation that they've got is to a betterment of that road for their operations and their vehicles. So hopefully that answers that one. Yeah, so in terms of hours of working, you indicated that the crushing plants, the operations sometimes extend beyond the hours that I mentioned and can go quite late. I think from the condition, the principal late operation is the asphalt plant, but I understand that there have been some instances where special dispensation has been allowed during, for instance, COVID to work the crushing plant later because of particular issues. Yes. At 11 o'clock through the night, I think residents might be able to answer that. We can certainly take that up with the applicants. What I would say is that there was a very robust schedule of conditions that we've discussed with the applicant, which they've agreed with. There is a regular review of that, but additionally, there is a local community liaison group, as you discussed with the other example, Councillor, and it meets every six months. There are currently six residents, local residents on it, but the option is there to sort of increase that. And maybe if the opportunity is there to increase the outreach so that the people that have written in have additional feedback from that group, but then the mechanism is there. In terms of dust and noise, there's a dust management plan that operates at the quarry. They ensure that there is available water. I think we saw today those that visited it. It was very wet, but when it is dry, trigger mechanisms imply and they apply bowsers and what have you. But it's a feedback situation. It may be there's a particularly windy and dried moment. Their procedures are proactive, so they will anticipate that. But if local residents find that there are issues at a particular time, then the opportunity is there to communicate that through the liaison committee mechanism or indeed directly to the quarry or to the planning officers. So there are ways of getting that across quickly, and the quarry will respond quickly if they're aware of an issue. In terms of noise again, as we went in on the whole road this afternoon, we saw a very well constructed acoustic wall adjacent to the school as you go in. And there has clearly been a lot of attention given to noise, but from time to time it's possible that there may be issues. Again, the message is if residents become aware of issues, contact the planning authority, contact the officers, contact the quarry directly, go through the local liaison mechanism. The infrastructure is there to report and act proactively on these issues. Thank you Graeme. Right. Councillor Giles-Lita, please. All right. Do you want to go first, Peter? Okay. When it goes red. Okay, lovely. Yeah, as you can imagine, most of the questions I was going to ask have already been asked and answered. I got one, which I'll leave to the very, very end, but it was very important, I think, for us to go to the site this afternoon. I learned an awful lot. I was not really -- I knew there was a quarry there, but having gone around it, I had gone around the roads that circulate around it. I was very impressed, actually. I think what Reid tried to do is work well with the community. There are 82 objections I would have thought we'd have had a few on here tonight if they were really serious. I know sometimes we worry about what may happen, but for what I've been told by officers or by Breeden, the answers are there. And I think this is particularly with the need for the minerals. I think this is a good thing for the area and needs to be passed. There was one question, though, which wasn't quite answered to do with blasting. We were told it was once a week. Will there be any increase on that at all in the next 26 years of whenever it is? My understanding is that it is not anticipated that there would be an increase. The amount of stone that can be won with individual blasts can vary. At the moment, around 30,000 tons of minerals is dropped for a given blast. And if you do the math, it indicates that there is the capability to work more than the 750,000 if it's all at that rate. But I think that there is no reason officers have to suspect that the frequency of blasting will need to increase. Though there may be some changes to the blasting rate, there may be some smaller blasts initially as you're going into the extension area. You're trying to develop faces from a narrow way in as it were. You don't have the same length of face available. But once equilibrium is established and you have the standard face widths, then the normal blasting regime ought to apply within the extension area and indeed at depth within the existing quarry. So no reason to suspect any change. However, the local liaison group is the mechanism whereby the quarry will report any sort of operational issues to the local community. And where there to be changed is then it would be through that mechanism that would be branched. Thank you. I would hope so too. There was mention of potential for flight tipping. While we were there today, we saw one. There was a flight tip down there if anyone from the parish council wishes to go along. And they may want to keep their eye on that just in case. Because although you don't expect it, it is kind of an ideal place for flight tips to take place. But overall, I think the positivity that came from this afternoon's visit and the answers I'm getting from this report make me believe this is only a good thing for the area and I would fully support it. Thank you. Thank you Peter. Right. Giles, you're next. Thank you very much. I'd just like to raise an issue that residents quite frequently speak to me about in my ward in Arkel and it concerns breeding aggregate lorries. My concern is that there will be an increase in the traffic to and from the quarry. If there's to be a potential output limit doubling, then I think it's very difficult to say that there won't be any increase at all in the amount of vehicular transport that occurs. Residents in my ward are concerned about this and we already have quite a frequent amount of breeding aggregate lorries travelling along Haygate Road and along the Hollyhead Road at quite a significant speed and it's quite frequent and it can sometimes be quite late at night. So if this were to go ahead, I would ask the applicant if there's a possibility that they could look at avoiding quite large aggregate lorries travelling along residential roads and residential areas such as Haygate Road and in particular. Thank you very much. In terms of the level of traffic, I think we find that with the existing quarry, it's very variable and you can get at times just one return load a day, but at the peak of operations you can get up to 300 return loads per day. Now that higher level, the quarry would be well within that during its extension in normal operations. I think yes they are seeking to increase the maximum output from the quarry, but it's just to provide flexibility at the upper end for intermittent times when there is a higher demand, but the officer expectation is that the normal historical rates of vehicle movements will be much nearer to the situation in practice and that the request to remove the current restriction simply allows greater flexibility during those more busier times, but doesn't imply a continuous doubling of the output rates. In terms of how the vehicles travel, obviously this is an existing use and the vehicles have an entitlement to use the public highway. But I think again, if there were to be particular concerns about the use of a given route at a given time, then the opportunity is there to discuss that with the officers, discuss it directly with the company and to see what can be done about it. We can't prevent the quarry from using the public highway which is entitled to do, but it may be that at times there is an opportunity to give prior notification if there are going to be campaigns using residential routes, but we are not looking at a kind of fundamental change to the signature of vehicle movements from the quarry relative to the current situation. Councillors interjecting. Right, Councillor Thomas Jank, please. Councillor interjecting. Right, thank you, Chair. I just want to thank Brede and actually for this very comprehensive planning application and the insight from the officers highways and planning for their technical insight. We, Councillors, really do a lot with regards to representing the people of this borough, obviously, it's our job. And out of the 74 objections, it's plain to see that those objections have been alleviated through the technical information we've seen. A lot of them appear to be perceptions as opposed to actual issues that aren't being addressed. And I'm happy to conclude, having read this report, they are all being addressed. So, if no of the members got any finalists left to say on this particular application, I'm happy to move the recommendation. Councillors interjecting. A comment really in relation to Councillor Lutas' request of the use of smaller vehicles. If you use smaller vehicles, isn't that going to increase the amount of traffic that's used on the roads? Yes, certainly. To make the obvious point, we're in a situation where this industry uses fuel. It's transporting bulky items over distance, particularly this quarry where the demand is regional and to some extent even in a more national. So, it isn't economically feasible to use smaller vehicles for this type of operation. It's not a kind of small local sand pit. It delivers on a regional and national basis. So, I think we are where we are with the HGVs. I think that my colleague Mark will indicate that the larger artics can have a lower ground pressure per axle and may actually have less potential for ground vibration when they're travelling. Certainly in terms of their turning manoeuvres, they can be easier to turn than a rigid chassis vehicle. So, I don't think we need to equate larger vehicles necessarily with highway issues. I can only echo what Graeme said there. One of the things that we do have to remember in Telford is that there is a lot of construction. There's a lot of houses being built. And by that very nature is that vehicles from the quarry, from other quarries, from other places that have material on board them do need to get to some of these places and they will need to go down to some residential streets. But I do appreciate what Councillor Lutor is saying and there is no reason whatsoever why there cannot be ongoing discussions in the future at looking at this type of thing and if there are any measures that can be put in place. As Graeme pointed out, it's very difficult if a vehicle is taxed. It's ensured there's no weight restriction on the road. It can pretty much go where it wants, regardless of any planning condition really to a certain extent. But there's no reason why we can't have those conversations with the quarry, with the developers in terms of maybe that they are better routes to get to the sites. Thank you, Mark. Charles, do you want to come back in there? Could I just have it noted that I didn't mention anything about having smaller vehicles? I don't know where Councillor Bentley got that from. I don't know whether he's listening. You said about the number of vehicles and maybe you could find an alternative use? Road. I've received smaller vehicles. Sorry, Councillor. I said alternative route. Road. As in alternative direction of travel. I think the microphone system works quite well. I thought everybody could hear everyone quite clearly. Thank you very much. I think the issue I was making about the particular roads being used was more a request from the applicant rather than a... I mean, I understand that it's not a planning condition and that a licensed vehicle can use any road. I just thought, you know, I'd raise it as an issue that is quite regularly commented on in my ward. But thank you very much. Thank you. Right, thank you. Thank you, Charles. If there are no other questions, I'll put the recommendation towards you. And it's recommended that delegated authority be granted to the development management service delivery manager to grant full planning permission subject to the terms of any subsequent legal agreement, conditions and informative notes. So if we can put that to the panel, everyone, for the proposal. That's one, two, three, four, five. Okay. Against? Oh, yeah, okay. Anybody against? One? Any abstaining on one abstention? Okay. The recommendation is that it's passed. So thank you all for attending tonight. Thank you for the public and thank you for the officers. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [BLANK_AUDIO]