Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations
2011
Details Pursuant Applications
Application Title: Extension to Caversham sand and gravel quarry with restoration
to agriculture and flood plain habitats using suitable imported inert restoration
material and construction of a new access off the A4155
Site: Caversham Quarry extension
Permission Number: MW.0158/11
Date Granted: 20th August 2014
Conditions applied to discharge:
12 – Liaison meeting details
13 – Advance planting details
18 – HGV signs
21 – Restoration detail
28 – Reptile mitigation
31 – Otter mitigation
32 – Ecological Management Group
35 – Berry Brook scheme
36 – Landscape and habitat management plan
38 – Protection of boundaries
39 – Landscape planting scheme
40 – Weed control scheme
48 – Archaeology written scheme of investigation
50 – Barrow protection scheme
58 – Topographical survey
62 – Groundwater levels monitoring
63 – Flood management plan
1. Was the original development accompanied by an Environmental Statement?
Yes
2. Is this a subsequent application to either a Schedule 1 or 2 development ?
Schedule 1 Yes
3. Has this application been the subject of a screening opinion or screening
direction?
No
4. Has an Environmental Statement been provided for this details pursuant
application?
No
If the answers to the above questions are YES to questions 1 and 2 and NO to
questions 3 and 4, then Regulation 8 applies and the planning authority should
determine whether the existing environmental information is sufficient to assess the
environmental effects of the development.
If the answers to the above questions are NO to question 1, YES to question 2 and
no to questions 3 and 4 then Regulation 9 applies and a screening opinion should be
completed
In this case Regulation 8 applies.
Is further environmental information necessary?
These submissions have been made to provide more information as required by a
range of conditions on the original consent. They provide further details about how
the approved development will be carried out, rather than proposing new elements of
development. This includes details of how liaison meetings will run, the design and
location of HGV signage, further detail of restoration proposals and protection of the
watercourse and biodiversity, how archaeology will be investigated throughout the
development and how the identified barrow feature will be protected, how
groundwater will be monitored and procedures in case of a flood. Therefore, the
information contained in these submissions provides further detail in themselves on
how the environmental impact of the original development will be controlled and
mitigated.
The elements of the original development which had the potential to cause
significant environmental effects were covered by the original Environmental
Statement. As it was originally prepared for an application submitted in 2011, some
of the information contained in the original ES might become out of date in the
course of the development. However, this is addressed by conditions on the consent
requiring the provision of updated environmental information, for example those
requiring up to date protected species surveys to be submitted prior to working in
each phase and continuing submission of groundwater reports, as required under
the Groundwater Level Monitoring plan.
Conclusion
I have considered the submission and it is my view that the original Environmental
Statement (ES) for the original planning consent (MW.0158/11) is adequate to
assess the environmental effects of the development and no further information is
needed.
The existing ES will be taken into consideration in making a decision on the
submission for these conditions, as required by Regulation 8 (2) of the Town &
Country Planning (EIA) Regulations 2011.
Signed ……M Thompson……………………………………………..
Date …22nd December 2014……………………………………………………..
Opinion approved by ……David
Periam……………………………………
On behalf of the Director for Environment & Economy
Date ……20th January 2015………………………………………………….