Decision details

A report was presented on an application for an amendment of Condition 6 of planning permission 8/10/0241, to allow approval of amended restoration contours together with the submission of a restoration and aftercare scheme to comply with Conditions 29 and 31 of planning permission 8/10/0241 at Round O Quarry, Cobbs Brow Lane, Lathom.

Committee had undertaken a site visit to Round O Quarry on Monday 15 July 2024.

This planning application had been reported to the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 24 April 2024, when it had been resolved to defer the application to allow the Committee to visit the site. This report had been set out at Appendix 'A.

The county council's Ecologist had visited the site on 22 May 2024 to advise on the current condition of the land and the restoration of the site. The Ecologists comments were set out in the Committee report. It was reported that a revised restoration scheme had now been submitted which included various amendments to the original proposal which were included in the Committee report.

The report included the views of the Greater Manchester Ecological Advisory Service. The views of West Lancashire Borough Council, Newburgh Parish Council, the Environment Agency and the Lancashire Badger Group had been detailed in the April 2024 Committee report, along with the details of the 3 representations objecting to the application.

The Head of Development Control presented a Powerpoint presentation showing site location plans and an aerial view of the application site, plan showing permitted contours, current contours with amended restoration proposals, a 1960's air photograph of the site and photographs of the view from Cobbs Brow Lane looking south and north, the view over the site, the view of the northern side of the site and the view of the western boundary.

Committee's attention was drawn to the Update Sheet which contained amendments to conditions 1b and 2.

Martin Ainscough, adjacent landowner, addressed the Committee and said the following:

'I own the land to the north, to the south, and to the east of Round O Quarry, and I'm really grateful that you've allowed me to speak today. At the last meeting, please remember that there was a huge amount of local objection to this proposal. I hope from your visit to site on Monday, you were able to see the enormous extent of the overtipping. I hope you were shown the conditions that the applicant was meant to have adhered to, and the complete avoidance of any of those conditions having being met. It's quite staggering how much money they've made out of the overtipping there and, more than anything, it's quite staggering that your executive seems to be quite happy to allow this to continue without any penalty and any real wish to see them do any more to improve the site. Thousands of extra movements to fill that quarry have been made to the detriment of the local area in Newburgh, theroads locally. Would it not be sensible to clawback some of that profit that they've made and put a 106 on the site? Or simply to take a bond which will ensure that the conditions that you're imposing are actually complied with. They've shown quite clearly that they ignore everything that this council suggests they should do, and I really, really think that significant management is required to return this site to what they're claiming is a biodiverse site. There is slippage, well you'll have seen, there is a very wet surface to the site, there is no drainage. It is having a severe impact on my land to the north, although there are potatoes growing there this year, there are parts of it that are not done, but most importantly at times of flood the water is just crossing the field and into Newburgh. Something needs to be looked at and nothing has been done. Simply planting 2 hedges is not sufficient - there should be regrading of the site, there should be a look at how the water is going to be controlled. Please don't just accept this.'

The Head of Development Control and the Director of Environment and Planning answered questions from Committee.

It was reported that a paper on the county council's enforcement activity would be discussed at a separate briefing session, to be held on the rising of the next Committee.

Committee raised several concerns around the drainage problems coming from the site. Committee were informed that an extra condition could be attached to the planning permission on how the run off from the site could be controlled.

After a lengthy discussion, it was Proposed and Seconded:

"That the application be deferred and that the applicant be requested to submit a drainage report."

Upon being put to the Vote, the Motion was Carried. It was therefore:

Resolved: That the application be deferred and that the applicant be requested to submit a drainage report.