Object
Initial Consultation document
Representation ID: 92033
Received: 09/08/2018
Respondent: Ms S Kedge
Following a chance conversation with my neighbour I wanted to express my concern at the proposed site.
Lack of notification;
I was wholly unaware of the plans or the meetings. It was not well publicised or communicated. The proposal for an email group will only work for the people who know about the proposal. A re-think is needed on communication strategy for the consultation to be meaningful. I would suggest Sibelco invest in a leaflet drop to every home in the villages- a tiny investment for full and proper engagement. Alternatively, most people will be on social media so a sponsored and targeted advert on social media would equally get engagement.
Archaeology
Looking at the proposal it is noted the site has multiple periods of archaeological finds from it but has not been fully searched. I cannot see how a desk-top exercise on an previously un-searched area will turn anything out, as it has not been properly searched. Without doing a full and proper investigation there is a significant loss of archaeology which would be unacceptable.
Increased road use
I note that there is a proposal for a new road to the processing plant. However, i cannot see how the plant will avoid increasing the number of trucks/ cars down very narrow lanes. Living down Westgate street we already have relative chaos every hour when the bus comes through. Additionally, I live in a very old cottage- 250+ years old. I am deeply worried at how the increased traffic- presumably from HGV- will have on the integrity of my and other houses of similar age.
Dust/ noise
I note there is a need for plans to address dust and noise pollution. I moved into Shouldham this year. One of the reasons was the peace and quiet. The prospect of having a 24/7 industrial noise in the village is just hideous. I do accept there is noise from RAF Marham, but that is periodic- not all of the time. What is the Db predicted from the plant?
Loss of beauty
Looking at other sites where extraction happens they look just awful. They look like what they are- industrial. The signage is industrial. The fencing is industrial. The dust and dirt on the roads is god awful ugly. That is before you consider the horror that will be left afterwards.
Increased danger
This is a safe area. Safe for children and animals. I cannot see anywhere in your plans how the increased danger to people and animals has been addressed. Children explore, animals roam. How will they be kept safe from the dangers of extraction, or the pits that are left behind. This is aside the increased danger from greater numbers of vehicles using the roads. The area is very popular for cyclists- weekdays and weekends. On such narrow roads this could turn the roads into death traps. Widening the roads might be one option, but would fundamentally destroy the charm of the area. Improved roads would also encourage even more traffic. At the moment they are avoided for the very reason they are narrow.
We have a lot of wildlife in the area- deer amongst the species. What safeguards and considerations are being given to the wildlife protection during extraction? This is beyond
Habitat disturbance
I note in the paperwork that the area is one of the last areas of untouched grassland in Norfolk. How can it be right to allow this to be destroyed forever?
The village has a significant number of bat roosts. I personally have two types of bat in my loft. One of which hibernates to the forest. How will you ensure these protected species will not be disturbed by the proposals?
Opportunities
There are opportunities for the company to think about how to improve the area- should it be used. This is beyond just sticking a bit of grass there and calling it a 'low bird-strike habitat'. Engage with the community and beyond to propose something different for us as the community in your applications- rather than just pillaging our area and leaving us with massive holes where the once valuable asset laid.
Following a chance conversation with my neighbour I wanted to express my concern at the proposed site.
Lack of notification;
I was wholly unaware of the plans or the meetings. It was not well publicised or communicated. The proposal for an email group will only work for the people who know about the proposal. A re-think is needed on communication strategy for the consultation to be meaningful. I would suggest Sibelco invest in a leaflet drop to every home in the villages- a tiny investment for full and proper engagement. Alternatively, most people will be on social media so a sponsored and targeted advert on social media would equally get engagement.
Archaeology
Looking at the proposal it is noted the site has multiple periods of archaeological finds from it but has not been fully searched. I cannot see how a desk-top exercise on an previously un-searched area will turn anything out, as it has not been properly searched. Without doing a full and proper investigation there is a significant loss of archaeology which would be unacceptable.
Increased road use
I note that there is a proposal for a new road to the processing plant. However, i cannot see how the plant will avoid increasing the number of trucks/ cars down very narrow lanes. Living down Westgate street we already have relative chaos every hour when the bus comes through. Additionally, I live in a very old cottage- 250+ years old. I am deeply worried at how the increased traffic- presumably from HGV- will have on the integrity of my and other houses of similar age.
Dust/ noise
I note there is a need for plans to address dust and noise pollution. I moved into Shouldham this year. One of the reasons was the peace and quiet. The prospect of having a 24/7 industrial noise in the village is just hideous. I do accept there is noise from RAF Marham, but that is periodic- not all of the time. What is the Db predicted from the plant?
Loss of beauty
Looking at other sites where extraction happens they look just awful. They look like what they are- industrial. The signage is industrial. The fencing is industrial. The dust and dirt on the roads is god awful ugly. That is before you consider the horror that will be left afterwards.
Increased danger
This is a safe area. Safe for children and animals. I cannot see anywhere in your plans how the increased danger to people and animals has been addressed. Children explore, animals roam. How will they be kept safe from the dangers of extraction, or the pits that are left behind. This is aside the increased danger from greater numbers of vehicles using the roads. The area is very popular for cyclists- weekdays and weekends. On such narrow roads this could turn the roads into death traps. Widening the roads might be one option, but would fundamentally destroy the charm of the area. Improved roads would also encourage even more traffic. At the moment they are avoided for the very reason they are narrow.
We have a lot of wildlife in the area- deer amongst the species. What safeguards and considerations are being given to the wildlife protection during extraction? This is beyond
Habitat disturbance
I note in the paperwork that the area is one of the last areas of untouched grassland in Norfolk. How can it be right to allow this to be destroyed forever?
The village has a significant number of bat roosts. I personally have two types of bat in my loft. One of which hibernates to the forest. How will you ensure these protected species will not be disturbed by the proposals?
Opportunities
There are opportunities for the company to think about how to improve the area- should it be used. This is beyond just sticking a bit of grass there and calling it a 'low bird-strike habitat'. Engage with the community and beyond to propose something different for us as the community in your applications- rather than just pillaging our area and leaving us with massive holes where the once valuable asset laid.