Object
Initial Consultation document
Representation ID: 92314
Received: 12/08/2018
Respondent: Dr Murray Gray
I write as (a) District Councillor for the Earsham Ward, and (b) a glacial geomorphologist and geodiversity expert (author of 2 editions of the book "Geodiversity: valuing and conserving abiotic nature" (Wiley-Blackwell, 2004 & 2013)).
As District Councillor my primary concern is the well-being of residents and the impact on them of quarrying activities. All 3 extension sites have houses nearby where impacts of noise, dust, traffic, etc. will need to be assessed. Site MIN209 is on the opposite side of the A143 to a field that has been submitted for housing allocation in the South Norfolk Council Local Plan, though no decision has been reached on this as yet.
As a glacial geomorphologist, the dilemma is that excavation of land often leads to evidence for past processes and environments yet also destroys physical features. Recent research at the existing quarry in Pheasants Walk, Earsham (Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, Vol 129, pps 70-88, 2018) has shed new light on the origin of the Earsham Terrace that has traditionally been interpreted as an outwash terrace deposited from a glacier whose terminus may have lain at Homersfield. The important point is that the gravel terrace and gravels at Earsham are scientifically important and this needs to be taken into account in the allocation sites for gravel extraction in this area. As such I have no objection to site MIN211 on Bath Hills Road which is east of the existing quarry and remote from the main terrace surface below Park Farm. Similarly, on geomorphological grounds, I have no objection to site MIN209 as an extension to the existing quarry. I have more problems with site MIN210 as it extends westwards into the main terrace surface, and would object to its allocation as a gravel extraction extension site.
I write as (a) District Councillor for the Earsham Ward, and (b) a glacial geomorphologist and geodiversity expert (author of 2 editions of the book "Geodiversity: valuing and conserving abiotic nature" (Wiley-Blackwell, 2004 & 2013)).
As District Councillor my primary concern is the well-being of residents and the impact on them of quarrying activities. All 3 extension sites have houses nearby where impacts of noise, dust, traffic, etc. will need to be assessed. Site MIN209 is on the opposite side of the A143 to a field that has been submitted for housing allocation in the South Norfolk Council Local Plan, though no decision has been reached on this as yet.
As a glacial geomorphologist, the dilemma is that excavation of land often leads to evidence for past processes and environments yet also destroys physical features. Recent research at the existing quarry in Pheasants Walk, Earsham (Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, Vol 129, pps 70-88, 2018) has shed new light on the origin of the Earsham Terrace that has traditionally been interpreted as an outwash terrace deposited from a glacier whose terminus may have lain at Homersfield. The important point is that the gravel terrace and gravels at Earsham are scientifically important and this needs to be taken into account in the allocation sites for gravel extraction in this area. As such I have no objection to site MIN211 on Bath Hills Road which is east of the existing quarry and remote from the main terrace surface below Park Farm. Similarly, on geomorphological grounds, I have no objection to site MIN209 as an extension to the existing quarry. I have more problems with site MIN210 as it extends westwards into the main terrace surface, and would object to its allocation as a gravel extraction extension site.