Issue - meetings

Planning Application : NWB/20CM015 - Hartshill Quarry, Nuneaton Road, Nuneaton

Meeting: 07/06/2022 - Regulatory Committee (Item 3)

3 Planning Application : NWB/20CM015 - Hartshill Quarry, Nuneaton Road, Nuneaton pdf icon PDF 350 KB

Additional documents:


Matthew Williams (Senior Planning Officer) provided a summary of the application alongside planning application NWB/20CM016 (agenda item 4). Both sought permission for mineral processing equipment, plant, and infrastructure at Hartshill Quarry, Nuneaton. He advised that NWB/20CM015 was a retrospective application; NWB/20CM016 proposed development of an aggregates washing plant and ancillary machinery. The applicant, Mr Kashan Aslam of Crown Aggregates, was present at the meeting.


Matthew Williams stated that:


·       The report provided details of another planning application for residential development proposed at land south of the site. This application was yet to be determined by North Warwickshire Borough Council.

·       A third application at Hartshill Quarry, not presented to the Committee at the meeting, sought an amendment to the phasing and working of the overall site to enable reworking of material.

·       Hartshill Quarry is a hard rock quarry with extraction by blasting and use of excavators. Mineral extraction has taken place at the site for over a century.

·       From the mid-1990s, the Quarry was not in operation. Following its sale in the mid-2010s, operations were re-established.


Matthew Williams advised that statutory consultees had not raised any objections ‘in principle’ to planning application NWB/20CM015. However, the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) had sought a condition for dust control. The EHO had expressed an interest in receipt of additional data relating to traffic flows and the impact of traffic on air quality monitoring and management. Matthew Williams advised that most traffic related to the existing permitted use of the site; many of the vehicles accessing the site were third-party hauliers which the applicant had no control over. Therefore, it may not be appropriate to introduce a condition for this consideration.


Matthew Williams advised that the Canal and River Trust had considered the proposal and made a request for information relating to the construction and management of the proposed attenuation pond.


Matthew Williams advised that Highways officers had acknowledged the limitations of the site access. However, it was recognised that Hartshill Quarry was an historic site; little could be done to improve the access. Highways officers had acknowledged that it was not proposed to intensify operations on site. There was no objection subject to conditions to ensure that vehicles would be clean and covered.


Matthew Williams advised that no objection had been raised by WCC Ecology. However, conditions specifying provision of a Landscape and Environmental Management Plan (LEMP) and Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) were requested.


Matthew Williams noted that the WCC Planning Policy response accepted that the proposal was generally in accordance with policy and could be supported. However, observations had been made in respect of production levels at the site. Production output figures had not been provided since the Quarry reopened. As a result, it was not possible to assess whether the application would lead to increased production. Matthew Williams advised that it was regrettable that the applicant had failed to engage with the Policy Team, but this was not a reason to refuse permission.


Matthew Williams provided a summary of representations that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3