Minutes of Gravel Meeting - 3rd December 7pm

The meeting began at the United Reform Church in Walkford at 7pm. Over 50 people attended the meeting. The Chair was Councillor Alan Griffiths (West Highcliffe), who introduced the first of four speakers.

Raeph Cumming – Christchurch Borough Council Planning Department

Raeph went through the stages of Hampshire’s County Council’s (HCC)  Mineral Plan; that we were at the Preferred Options Stage, which would be followed in October 2008 by the Submission Stage, where the Inspector would review the Minerals Plan for soundness. We could write again at this stage.

Presuming the plan was sound, the next stage would be a Public Examination of the final plan.

Hampshire must provide 2.63 million tonnes of gravel each year, with 44% of that coming from the New Forest area – a raw deal for the New Forest!

Raeph showed a map of the extent of sand and gravel deposits, and that a Dorset Minerals plan was on the way, which could well try and meet up with the Hampshire plan around Roeshot.

The minimum distance accepted from houses is generally 250m but this could be overcome by building banks at the edge of the sites.

On the Walkford site

Raeph explained that Walkford had been ruled out simply because the gravel needs could be met by other sites with fewer issues e.g. Walkford had nearby housing, the burial ground, access difficulties and two different owners.

Raeph stressed that the Walkford site could be re-included if the landowner or another consultee made a strong case at this stage!

On the Roeshot site

This site would allow Hampshire to meet its needs up to 2020! New sites only get planning to be dug if gravel reserves are < 7 years (they are at this stage now)

Single landowner.

3 million tonnes of gravel, 80 hectares in size, planned operation from 2010-2020.

Corner of the site near housing, only separated by a cutting, not a full bank.

Shares a boundary with the New Forest National Park.

When restored sites normally become lakes, agricultural land, biodiversity areas etc.

Issue that site could well be extended once permission granted.

Still earmarked for filling in with non-hazardous (household) waste.

Burton common is an Site Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which Natural England would want to investigate, probably through an impact assessment at a later stage.

Estimated that 103 lorries would be required each day!

New housing also planned west of the site (600 homes).

Raeph finished by telling us that there would be 6 mineral actions in the Christchurch area if Roeshot went ahead, which is a high number.

Dr Chris Day from WRAGE then spoke on the subject of Walkford.

Chris thanked everyone for writing to object at the previous stage, and thanked Raeph for his contributions.

Commended the letter writing approach, which worked through sheer volume.

Chris also set out WRAGE’s position, that it was making a submission to HCC, that it opposes extraction at Walkford, welcomes the decision to reject, and requests immediate notification if the anyone submits to have it returned to the Mineral’s plan.

Chris urged people to write to object again this time.

John Lloyd of WRAGE then delivered a presentation on the issues at Roeshot.

John drew the analogy of Roeshot as the ‘Dark Horse’ site, as we still don’t know much about it, but it is becoming a favourite.

Walkford had more of an immediate impact, so it was a temptation to think that Roeshot wasn’t anything to worry about, but….

It is a HUGE site (John showed the scale by showing how many of the entire Sainsbury’s and Stewart’s site could fit into it).

John warned that we had had a sneak preview of how the Roeshot site will expand North and East. This is the end of a much bigger wedge he exclaimed!

Roeshot is in the green belt which is meant to provide openness between urban areas, but not the openness of a huge gravel pit!

It is near housing, contains public footpaths, and also watercourses leading to the River Mude and into Christchurch harbour.

It borders directly the National Park – it would provide an unpleasant ‘Welcome to the National Park’.

A large number of lorries would end up on our congested roads, and the lorry drivers decide how they want to leave the site, and which roads they want to use.

John finished explaining that we shouldn’t be led to believe that Roeshot would be instead of the Downton and Ashley sites, it would be in addition to their lorries.

John received a round of applause.

Peter Martin, Chairman of WRAGE summed up the meeting with ‘thoughts on things to come’.

Peter displayed a map of Dorset showing the extent of the sand and gravel deposits, and explained how much there was that might be exploited, once sites were put forward.

Peter referred to a ‘war on two fronts’ with Hampshire pushing for its sites at Roeshot and Walkford, and Dorset wanting to then do the same on the other side of the county boundary.

Peter finished up by urging people to object, and also get their neighbours to object to te Walkford and Roeshot sites now, which will help against the Dorset case in the future.

The speakers then answered questions and various speakers raised issues.

• Traffic issue – a lorry every 4 mins, huge threat to Burton and Christchurch
• A Burton councillor raised the question of replicating the Hampshire lorry ban, with a Christchurch lorry ban.
• The archaeological importance of the area was raised. Barrows had been found nearby, and there has been Bronze Age finds around Burton common. The whole area is unexplored so far.
• The area would end up like Ringwood where the concrete plant already sent lorries though Burton on B roads.
• There is a crude oil pipeline from Poole Harbour to Fawley which runs right through the site. Would this not be an environmental hazard, particularly with the watercourses running close by?
• A councillor from New Milton offered his support, and that they didn’t like the way people were being forced to choose between sites. We should object to all sites in our community.
• Councillor Lofts (Highcliffe) referred to the hydrology, the streams all lead to the harbour which would become silted up the east. HCC should pay for a survey.
• Councillor Denise Jones (Grange) objected to the traffic the site would bring through Grange, particularly how it would affect the children’s play areas.
• A question was asked as to why the burial ground had not been seen to be objecting. The reason was unknown.
• Councillor David Jones (West Highcliffe) raised two points. Firstly that 600 homes were planned within feet of the proposed Roeshot site. Secondly the likely impact of traffic, that HCC had proposed access at either Sainsbury’s, or Staplecross, or via the ‘Pick Your Own’ Access. HCC prefer the A31.
• Was rail an option to move the gravel? Probably not as gravel usually went on short journeys.

The meeting was concluded.