Object
Initial Consultation document
Representation ID: 92140
Received: 12/08/2018
Respondent: Mr Jon Pepperill
RE: PROPOSED SITE SIL 02 As preferred area for Silica Sand extraction.
As resident of Marham for over 10 years I must unreservedly object to the proposed silica sand quarry in the heart of Marham Fen, Shouldham and the Nar Valley. This proposal is completely impractical for many reasons and will be detrimentally harmful to the environment and communities involved.
This may well be the preferred location for silica sand extraction; however, I believe that this development will have a devastating impact on 2 rural communities, already affected by a rapidly expanding RAF base of strategic national importance.
The proposal put forward by Sibelco appear to be an optimistic "best case scenario", which plays down the negative impact for the communities, surrounding environment and ignores potential health concerns when taking into account the size and duration of the planned development.
In particular my objections are based on the following grounds:
Health/Safety and Environmental objections,
* Increased levels of noise, light and waste pollution. The proposal includes 24hr operation of this quarry. Marham already has high levels of noise pollution from military activity, adding to this is an unreasonable request of the community.
* It is the major area of dark sky between Marham airbase and Middleton aggregates at Pentney. The increased light pollution would adversely affect the Bat populations within this area and other nocturnal wildlife.
* Proposed screening of the quarry is likely to be ineffective for Marham residents especially those within close proximity and those on a high elevation who will look down onto the site.
* The site is known for its keen and prevailing North and North westerly winds which will aggravate the noise and dust pollution.
* The proposed screening by bunding would not be in keeping with the current environment which is a river valley setting with historic connections between Marham Abbey and Pentney Priory, It would obstruct a view that has been there for over a thousand years and the reason we bought our current home!
* The River Nar is a SSSI under Section 28 of the Wildlife and country act 1981. It is a chalk bed river and an integral part of this landscape. It supports an abundance of wildlife and protected species such as White Clawed Crayfish, Kingfisher, Barn Owls and Water voles to name a few. This eco structure would be irrevocably damaged should there be any attempt to take minerals from this area or construction of a dredging pipeline in the proposed site.
* Native and migrating wild birds use this land including Buzzards, Red Kites, Bearded Tits, Fieldfare and Lapwing some of which are protected species.
* The Nar valley is of high amenity value to local residents and ramblers.
* This is the only proposed site within a high- risk flood area. Flood risk would be exacerbated by removing ancient drainage ditches and soak away land.
* No information provided regarding the impact of mineral extraction on local water table/supply and water quality.
* At this current time, no restoration plan has been proposed. This is important as many previous extraction sites have been left in poor or dangerous condition.
Infrastructure objections,
* The road system is classified as rural with its surface struggling and in poor condition generally.
* Existing roads are unsuitable for HGV's and plant access. Reflecting this RAF traffic is prohibited from the village.
* Increased traffic volume on A47 and A10 will impact negatively on already busy roads.
Economic objections,
* No proposed benefits to either village.
* No additional jobs for local residents.
* Reduction in house price values. Creation of "trapped "residents unable to sell their houses.
* Potential impact on household insurance due to increased flood risk.
Historical buildings,
* Pentney Abbey, Nar Bone Mill are sites of historical interest and must be protected from unwanted disturbances if there are to remain preserved for future generations.
Health objections,
* There is higher than national average of Lung related conditions (Including COPD, Emphysema and Asthma) in these communities. Exposure to pollutants and increased silica dust exposure will have a significant impact on their health.
* Not all dust is visible! Long term exposure (10-20 years) to the minute Silica dust particles carries a risk of Siliceous.
* Loss of public rights of way to access the Nar valley will impact negatively on physical and mental wellbeing.
* Increased stress and anxiety regarding, noise and pollution will have a detrimental effect on overall health.
Please take these above points as my formal objection to this proposed silica sand quarry site SIL 02
I am sure Norfolk county council will be able to find an alternative site that will not impact so negatively on the community and environment as proposed site SIL 02 does.
RE: PROPOSED SITE SIL 02 As preferred area for Silica Sand extraction.
As resident of Marham for over 10 years I must unreservedly object to the proposed silica sand quarry in the heart of Marham Fen, Shouldham and the Nar Valley. This proposal is completely impractical for many reasons and will be detrimentally harmful to the environment and communities involved.
This may well be the preferred location for silica sand extraction; however, I believe that this development will have a devastating impact on 2 rural communities, already affected by a rapidly expanding RAF base of strategic national importance.
The proposal put forward by Sibelco appear to be an optimistic "best case scenario", which plays down the negative impact for the communities, surrounding environment and ignores potential health concerns when taking into account the size and duration of the planned development.
In particular my objections are based on the following grounds:
Health/Safety and Environmental objections,
* Increased levels of noise, light and waste pollution. The proposal includes 24hr operation of this quarry. Marham already has high levels of noise pollution from military activity, adding to this is an unreasonable request of the community.
* It is the major area of dark sky between Marham airbase and Middleton aggregates at Pentney. The increased light pollution would adversely affect the Bat populations within this area and other nocturnal wildlife.
* Proposed screening of the quarry is likely to be ineffective for Marham residents especially those within close proximity and those on a high elevation who will look down onto the site.
* The site is known for its keen and prevailing North and North westerly winds which will aggravate the noise and dust pollution.
* The proposed screening by bunding would not be in keeping with the current environment which is a river valley setting with historic connections between Marham Abbey and Pentney Priory, It would obstruct a view that has been there for over a thousand years and the reason we bought our current home!
* The River Nar is a SSSI under Section 28 of the Wildlife and country act 1981. It is a chalk bed river and an integral part of this landscape. It supports an abundance of wildlife and protected species such as White Clawed Crayfish, Kingfisher, Barn Owls and Water voles to name a few. This eco structure would be irrevocably damaged should there be any attempt to take minerals from this area or construction of a dredging pipeline in the proposed site.
* Native and migrating wild birds use this land including Buzzards, Red Kites, Bearded Tits, Fieldfare and Lapwing some of which are protected species.
* The Nar valley is of high amenity value to local residents and ramblers.
* This is the only proposed site within a high- risk flood area. Flood risk would be exacerbated by removing ancient drainage ditches and soak away land.
* No information provided regarding the impact of mineral extraction on local water table/supply and water quality.
* At this current time, no restoration plan has been proposed. This is important as many previous extraction sites have been left in poor or dangerous condition.
Infrastructure objections,
* The road system is classified as rural with its surface struggling and in poor condition generally.
* Existing roads are unsuitable for HGV's and plant access. Reflecting this RAF traffic is prohibited from the village.
* Increased traffic volume on A47 and A10 will impact negatively on already busy roads.
Economic objections,
* No proposed benefits to either village.
* No additional jobs for local residents.
* Reduction in house price values. Creation of "trapped "residents unable to sell their houses.
* Potential impact on household insurance due to increased flood risk.
Historical buildings,
* Pentney Abbey, Nar Bone Mill are sites of historical interest and must be protected from unwanted disturbances if there are to remain preserved for future generations.
Health objections,
* There is higher than national average of Lung related conditions (Including COPD, Emphysema and Asthma) in these communities. Exposure to pollutants and increased silica dust exposure will have a significant impact on their health.
* Not all dust is visible! Long term exposure (10-20 years) to the minute Silica dust particles carries a risk of Siliceous.
* Loss of public rights of way to access the Nar valley will impact negatively on physical and mental wellbeing.
* Increased stress and anxiety regarding, noise and pollution will have a detrimental effect on overall health.
Please take these above points as my formal objection to this proposed silica sand quarry site SIL 02
I am sure Norfolk county council will be able to find an alternative site that will not impact so negatively on the community and environment as proposed site SIL 02 does.