The two applications for Pilkington Quarry 83299/09 and 83999/10 are scheduled for 2pm, 19/08/2010, at Bolton Town Hall.
The recommendation to the Chief Planner is to refuse 83299/09 but to accept 83999/10. This is based on the legal advice on whether the applicant can challenge the end date. The four local groups have always accepted that this date can be challenged (although point 27 in the Council’s advice requires further consideration). Having made this assessment the Council is then required to consider due process for the application.
1 There is a legal requirement for an Environmental Impact screening , for all reviews of conditions. This has been pointed out by the GMGU but appears to have been ignored.
Planning permission may not be granted (or new mineral conditions determined) for a proposal for EIA development unless all of the information about the likely environmental effects of the proposal have been taken into consideration by the local planning authority
2 Irrespective of UK law, a recent ruling in the European Court requires an EIA be considered prior to committee.
3 The situation is also made more confusing by the fact that the quarry has not extracted stone for four years and is described as inactive on searches. The applicant wrote to Bolton Council on 1 September 2008 advising them that extraction was complete, and as such restoration should already have been completed. This contradicts point 27 of the legal advice
4 People have been mislead by the information available when purchasing houses etc. The Earthline case makes it very clear that in this scenario it is for the courts to decide what remedial action should take place. The applicant makes it very clear in this application that this is as result of an error by the council – and therefore any compensation is likely to be payable by the council.
Once again the elected members of the Planning Committee will be put in a very difficult position.
We have also been awarded Rule 6 status for the upcoming appeal, due to the evidence which we now possess. This will give us the same legal rights as Bolton Council, and Armstrong’s in the appeal.
Our twenty complaints are now being considered by the Ombudsman and we will be requesting that they widen their investigation
