MIN 71 - land west of Norwich Road, Holt - Question 76

I disagree with the initial conclusion of the Planning Officer that: the site is considered suitable for sand and gravel extraction, subject to any planning application addressing the requirements below..."
I would comment as follows:

AMENITY:
1. "The nearest residential property is 11m from the site boundary"
An inspection of local maps shows that a number of properties directly share a boundary with the mineral site, or are the width of a road from the boundary.
2. "There are 82 sensitive receptors within 250m of the site boundary. Most of these properties are in the settlement of Holt, which is 26m away."
This statement fails to convey the fact that significant numbers of people living in Holt will be affected by the proximity of the site. No figure of actual numbers is given but it would not be unreasonable to estimate a figure in the range of 160 to 240.
3. "The greatest impact will be within 100 metres of a source..."
No number is given here, but in the context of the above statement, it clearly needs to be addressed.

LANDSCAPE: "graded screen bunds would be required on site boundaries... boundary treatments in the form of hedge and woodland planning would improve screening of the site... a standoff area from these properties (would be needed) for the site to be acceptable."
There are a number of properties on different sides of the quarry which require stand off protection, and substantive landscape treatments to properly protect the inhabitants. It is clear that the scale and extent of works needed to the quarry would cause a serious loss of amenity to residents and tourists alike, and would visually impair the open and attractive landscapes of one of the major roads into Holt.

ECOLOGY: There are numerous references to County Wildlife Sites, giving the distance from the site boundary:
CWS 2006 'Spout Common' is 460m from the site boundary.
CWS 2121 'Common Hills Plantation' is 220m from the site boundary.
CWS 1093 'Disused railway' is 500m from the site boundary.
CWS 1098 'Edgefield Heath' is 250m from the site boundary.
There is though, no mention of Holt Country Park, which is a Green Flag award winner and is situated near the site - it is a woodland dominated by Scots pines and native broadleaves, with orchids, a wide variety of butterflies, dragonflies and damselflies and an abundant display of wildlife including goldcrests, greater spotted woodpeckers and deer.

CONCLUSION:
There are significant numbers of residents within a short distance of the site boundaries. Many of them are of retirement age with respiratory and medical complaints which are exacerbated by dust, pollution and contaminants.
in order to mitigate the risk of quarrying to residents in such close proximity, significant landscape and groundworks need to be undertaken, which in themselves risk being intrusive in their own right. The visual impact on nearby dwellings and the disruption to the surrounding landscape would be severe, and it would significantly affect the residents and visiting tourists quiet enjoyment of the surrounding countryside.

I would refer the Planning Department to other sites in their consultation document that they found 'unacceptable' due to the detrimental impact quarrying would have on the landscape and residential properties, and ask that they apply the same policy to MIN 71.

MIN 23 Land North of back Land Beeston "mineral extraction at this site would have unacceptable landscape impacts".
MIN 116 land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth "local landscape impacts would be unacceptable".
MIN 74 land at Turf Field, Watlington Road "Any mineral working on this site would have unacceptable impacts on the landscape".
MIN 32 land west of Lime Kiln Road, West Dereham "Any mineral working on this site would have unacceptable impacts on the landscape."