STUTTON CUM HAZLEWOOD PARISH COUNCIL
Minutes of the Extra-ordinary Meeting of Stutton cum Hazlewood Parish Council held on 26 November 2019 at 19:30 in the Stutton Village Hall.
Clerk: Mrs G Kitchen.
Email: email@example.com Tel: 07796 544404
Meetings are open to the press and public except for any item labelled as Part 2 under the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960.
Present: Cllr D Birchall (Chairman), Cllr P Spurrier (Vice-Chairman), Cllr C Heard, Cllr K Grayson, Cllr D Mackay, Cllr R Sweeting
Twenty-six members of the public.
Chairman welcomed councillors and visitors to the meeting and explained the procedure that would be followed in the extra-ordinary meeting.
191122. Declarations of interest
To receive and record any declarations of personal, prejudicial and disclosable pecuniary interests – none declared.
Apologies were accepted from Cllr S Wrigglesworth and Mrs G Kitchen.
191124. Minutes of previous meeting
The minutes of the 14th November 2019 ordinary meeting would be considered at the next ordinary meeting on 13 January 2020.
Councillors reviewed previous comments on the following application –
NY/2018/0009/FUL – Extraction of 30,000 tonnes of limestone and importation of 600,000 tonnes of construction waste to complete restoration and export of 300,000 tonnes of secondary aggregate at Old London Road Quarry, Stutton, Tadcaster, LS24 9NQ.
The application was originally submitted in mid-January 2018. In February 2018 North Yorkshire County Council instituted a neighbour consultation and 21 members of the public attended a Parish Council meeting on 28 February. Many comments were made in the public forum and the following were submitted to NYCC:
•Questioned as to what the benefits for the local community would be
as it appeared to be only negative outcomes for local residents.
•Concerns regarding safety – primarily the amount of lorries using a 1
mile stretch of public bridleway, for 6 days a week over a 6 year
period. Speed of the lorries was also a concern for vulnerable users of
the area such as cyclists, horse riders, pedestrians etc.
•Access for local residents – particularly for Cocksford residents
during rush hour periods. Additionally, it was questioned as to which
alternative routes would be used if the roads indicated in the
application were blocked.
•Environmental issues such as noise and dust pollution from the
crushing plant together with a loss of wildlife habitat (albeit
•A question was raised over the apparent imbalance of 600,000 of
aggregate in with 300,000 out – why did it have to be processed
onsite and not elsewhere?
•Central government had produced a report on land banks and
discounted the Old London Road site – why was it being considered
•Why was the crushing plant being sited at this quarry?
The quarry owner, Mr T Fawcett, together with Jakto Transport of Barnsley and John Carlin of Cromwell Wood Estate Company of Wakefield, subsequently held a well-attended consultation meeting in Stutton Village Hall on 21 March 2018. Following this the Parish Council took legal advice and submitted the following further comments to NYCC after its 12 July 2018 meeting:
The recent planning application to re-activate the Old London Road Quarry has caused considerable concern to local residents. The Parish Council has received numerous objections, recommends that the application be refused, and now asks North Yorkshire County Council to take the following matters into consideration when determining the application.
It is proposed that up to fifty HGV movements into and out of the site should be made for six days a week over six years. The route would be along Moor Lane, already a hazardous rat run between the A659 and the A162, then turning onto Old London Road for a mile. Old London Road is a public bridleway and mainly single track byway, which is also the means of access for residents of the settlement at Cocksford. The bridleway is also used extensively by walkers, dog walkers, children, cyclists and horse riders.
This application would therefore be in clear breach of the following policies:
Policy 4/13 of the Minerals – Local Plan and
Policy 4/18 of the of the Waste – Local Plan.
It is clear that this is an application for a commercially profitable waste recycling facility in the Green Belt rather than being primarily a landscaping project; if it were not the company concerned would not have submitted it. The application involves the import of 600,000 tonnes of waste matter to be crushed and separated on site, with associated dust and noise pollution, and with 300,000 tonnes of aggregate being exported out again. Further the site is adjacent to and above the Cock Beck which would inevitably be subject to pollution.
It would appear that the application would be in breach of the following provisions of the Waste – Local Plan:
Policy 4/1 a, c, g, and j – waste management proposals;
Policy 4/14 – historic environment;
Policy 4/19 – quality of life;
Policy 4/20 – open space, recreation and public rights of way;
Policy 5/3 e, and g – recycling, sorting and transfer of industrial, commercial and household waste;
Policy 6/1 a, d, and e – landfill proposals.
and in conflict with the following provisions of the North Yorkshire Draft Joint Minerals and Waste Development Local Plan:
Draft Policy D02 – local amenity and cumulative impacts;
Draft Policy D09 – water environment.
The application then remained fairly dormant until 15 November 2019 when the Parish Council received a re-consultation notice from NYCC, in the light of which this extra-ordinary meeting was convened. Relatively few additional submissions had been made over the last year, and most recently NYCC and the owner’s agent had been negotiating a further extension, with the latter requesting an extension to 28 February 2020.
191126. Public Forum
Standing orders were suspended for this item in order to allow a full discussion of the planning application. Amongst the points raised by MOPs were:
MOP has contacted Highways Officer to point out significant inaccuracies in his “no-objections” letter. These include: a higher number of road traffic collisions than reported; traffic volume; and residents impacted. It was reported that the Highways Officer was reviewing his position.
Cllr Mackay commented that he would attend the planning meeting at which the quarry application was considered. He also undertook to contact the Highways Officer about his report.
MOP presented a report regarding potential pollution of the aquifer. Key points were:
- Application lodged for 600,000 tonnes of construction waste approximately equivalent to 98,300 8 yard3 standard builder’s skips;
- This construction waste will inevitably contain pollutants (asbestos, asphalt road planings, bitumastic sealants, sulphur and heavy metal contaminants from coal fired chimneys and furnaces including lead, arsenic, mercury, thallium, cadmium. nickel, chromium, etc);
- There will be vehicle and machinery pollutants, including engine oil, hydraulic fluid from pipe failures, general onsite maintenance, etc;
- In times of heavy rainfall this will be flushed into Cock Beck;
- The fall between the proposed reprocessing site and Cock Beck is more than 3 meters, the dwell time in the slow-moving Beck will allow pollutants to percolate into the aquifer for many many years;
- The nature of the brewery pumping from the aquifer will encourage more and faster deposition of pollutants into the aquifer;
- Further geological factors such as the fault/fracture zone from Bramham Moor to Grimston Grange has created a highly permeable fissure aquifer;
- Any contamination of the aquifer would be devastating to the three Breweries in Tadcaster and devastating to Tadcaster town.
The MOP was asked to share his report and findings with the three Tadcaster Breweries and with the Planning Officer.
MOP reported on the proposed “phased extraction” outlined in the quarry application. He highlighted that this was an extraction from under Old London Road, requiring the existing track to be moved, impacting on the historic battlefield site.
MOP commented that there was a pollution risk to the borehole in Cocksford, which had not been considered in any of the supporting application papers;
MOP reported that there was a material inaccuracy in the quarry application in that it reported that 5 properties would be affected in Cocksford; the actual number is 35 properties;
MOP commented on the proposal to “line” the quarry with a clay impermeable layer and highlighted that given the rainfall, etc over time the layer will simply be overtopped and pollutants will find their way into Cock Beck;
MOP made the points that it is not unusual for an applicant to submit additional information in this way, that NYCC are following the standard procedure in re-consulting on the new information. and that it is important for people in the village to respond with their individual comments – this should be in response to the new information but it is also an opportunity to re-state original objections (the number of objections submitted matters), to concentrate on planning issues that an inspector would consider and to copy in Nigel Adams as our prospective MP.
There followed wider public comment about the application.
All MOPs who had spoken were asked to ensure that they sent their reports, observations and comments to the Planning Officer dealing with this application.
- To raise issues of inconsistency with Highways Officer as they materially affect his conclusion.
- To enquire about the possibility of the planning committee making a site visit before any decisions are taken.
- To ask NYCC to ensure that their renewed consultation is improved, eg the nearest neighbour to the quarry has not been consulted.
- To advise NYCC of the continuing strength of local feeling against this application, to reaffirm the Parish Council’s earlier objection to the proposal and to add the further points raised at this meeting.
191127. Closure of Part 1 of the council meeting at 20.30.
Members of the public and press are excluded from this part of the meeting.
Signed: Gill Kitchen clerk to Stutton cum Hazlewood Parish Council – 29/11/2019