Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98173
Received: 03/10/2019
Respondent: Mr I McIntyre
PROPOSED SAND & GRAVEL EXTRACTION AT WAVENEY FOREST - 2019 PROPOSAL.
I understand that application has been made to have the Waveney Forest designated by the County Council as a site for sand and gravel extraction and that the proposed extraction zones and associated works are virtually identical to the previous unsuccessful application (MIN 38) - See map P3.
You will see from the map that my house Forest Lodge is sited close to and dominantly down-wind of the extraction pit and likely to receive a lions share of airborne quarry dust.
Concerning health it is to be noted that [redacted text - personal data] These breathing problems could well be, exacerbated by airborne quarry dust. Also there have been many articles in medical journals like Lancet, too numerous to cite here, that highlight the risks of exposure to even low levels of airborne particulates.
I find this all quite worrying as the proposed quarry extends to within 120 metres of this house - only some 100 metres from our boundary. Even less reassuring are the robust downwind measurements of harmful quarry dust summarised in the Appendix 1 (P5) attached. When these are adjusted for the different site background dust levels and plotted against distance downwind from source we get the classical 'fall-out' curve akin to that for airborne post nuclear detonation or volcanic particles (albeit on a much smaller scale) which is just as one might expect, see Figure 1 below.
Shown along the lower margin of figure 1 on the same scale is the distance of both the house and our boundary fence from the quarry pit on a N.E. bearing. I have also drawn a horizontal line to show the U.K. National Air Quality Objective and European Directive limit of 40 µg/m3 annual mean, see Appendix 2 (P6). The plot shows the maximum allowable limit is exceeded for some 300 metres downwind of the pit. Furthermore at the distance of our house this limit is exceeded by some 55%, still more for part of the garden.
There is another matter of concern- Figure 2 below shows the windrose deemed appropriate by the would-be pit developers. For insight I have hand written round the edge the number of days per annum (totalling 365) when the wind blows from the direction of concern (proportional to the length of the rose 'petal'). It is apparent that on average, the wind blows towards the N.E. i.e. from the S.W. directly from the pit to my property. It is clear that our location could not be worse from the wind point of view.
As well as the environmental impact of dust cited above the quarry will have a massive noise impact, Despite the huge resources of the aggregates industry the applicants have seemingly failed to provide the required estimate of the expected sound generation of their activities, a conservative estimate would be some 84 dB at a range of 15metres. The basic premise of noise impact assessment is that the quieter the location the less acceptable is any sound addition (Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment 2002) .
Taking account of the proximity of the pit and the extremely low background sound level The perceived sound level at Forest Lodge will be several times that equating with the threshold of the highest (of five) noise impact categories (10 dB above background- termed Major noise impact).
Applicants have in the past made reference to 'mitigation measures' claimed to reduce the impact of their activities. There is a seeming lack however of independent quantitative scientific evidence of their level of effectiveness. The aggregates industry, however, have the resources to procure such evidence if the outcome were likely to be to their advantage, yet they have not.
The Planning Environment Division of H.M. Communities Dept. recognise that mineral extraction has an environmental impact and that planners should give very careful consideration to its likely effects on the surrounding area, taking account of the views of local residents. Also I understand that Local Authorities are now responsible for both the health and wellbeing of their residents.
Accordingly at this time I, together with other Fritton residents, are placing our trust in you as our first line of defence against the environmental impact of his proposed quarry so close to and upwind of us.
It is to be noted that if the Waveney Forest remains well managed and intact the carbon sequestered by the trees will enable the planned aggregate yield to be fetched many, many, miles by road from a more suitable site (non-forested, not near habitation, safe road access) on a lower carbon budget. This will accord with national policy of maintaining and increasing tree cover to limit climate change.
PROPOSED SAND & GRAVEL EXTRACTION AT WAVENEY FOREST - 2019 PROPOSAL.
I understand that application has been made to have the Waveney Forest designated by the County Council as a site for sand and gravel extraction and that the proposed extraction zones and associated works are virtually identical to the previous unsuccessful application (MIN 38) - See map P3.
You will see from the map that my house Forest Lodge is sited close to and dominantly down-wind of the extraction pit and likely to receive a lions share of airborne quarry dust.
Concerning health it is to be noted that [redacted text - personal data] These breathing problems could well be, exacerbated by airborne quarry dust. Also there have been many articles in medical journals like Lancet, too numerous to cite here, that highlight the risks of exposure to even low levels of airborne particulates.
I find this all quite worrying as the proposed quarry extends to within 120 metres of this house - only some 100 metres from our boundary. Even less reassuring are the robust downwind measurements of harmful quarry dust summarised in the Appendix 1 (P5) attached. When these are adjusted for the different site background dust levels and plotted against distance downwind from source we get the classical 'fall-out' curve akin to that for airborne post nuclear detonation or volcanic particles (albeit on a much smaller scale) which is just as one might expect, see Figure 1 below.
Shown along the lower margin of figure 1 on the same scale is the distance of both the house and our boundary fence from the quarry pit on a N.E. bearing. I have also drawn a horizontal line to show the U.K. National Air Quality Objective and European Directive limit of 40 µg/m3 annual mean, see Appendix 2 (P6). The plot shows the maximum allowable limit is exceeded for some 300 metres downwind of the pit. Furthermore at the distance of our house this limit is exceeded by some 55%, still more for part of the garden.
There is another matter of concern- Figure 2 below shows the windrose deemed appropriate by the would-be pit developers. For insight I have hand written round the edge the number of days per annum (totalling 365) when the wind blows from the direction of concern (proportional to the length of the rose 'petal'). It is apparent that on average, the wind blows towards the N.E. i.e. from the S.W. directly from the pit to my property. It is clear that our location could not be worse from the wind point of view.
As well as the environmental impact of dust cited above the quarry will have a massive noise impact, Despite the huge resources of the aggregates industry the applicants have seemingly failed to provide the required estimate of the expected sound generation of their activities, a conservative estimate would be some 84 dB at a range of 15metres. The basic premise of noise impact assessment is that the quieter the location the less acceptable is any sound addition (Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment 2002) .
Taking account of the proximity of the pit and the extremely low background sound level The perceived sound level at Forest Lodge will be several times that equating with the threshold of the highest (of five) noise impact categories (10 dB above background- termed Major noise impact).
Applicants have in the past made reference to 'mitigation measures' claimed to reduce the impact of their activities. There is a seeming lack however of independent quantitative scientific evidence of their level of effectiveness. The aggregates industry, however, have the resources to procure such evidence if the outcome were likely to be to their advantage, yet they have not.
The Planning Environment Division of H.M. Communities Dept. recognise that mineral extraction has an environmental impact and that planners should give very careful consideration to its likely effects on the surrounding area, taking account of the views of local residents. Also I understand that Local Authorities are now responsible for both the health and wellbeing of their residents.
Accordingly at this time I, together with other Fritton residents, are placing our trust in you as our first line of defence against the environmental impact of his proposed quarry so close to and upwind of us.
It is to be noted that if the Waveney Forest remains well managed and intact the carbon sequestered by the trees will enable the planned aggregate yield to be fetched many, many, miles by road from a more suitable site (non-forested, not near habitation, safe road access) on a lower carbon budget. This will accord with national policy of maintaining and increasing tree cover to limit climate change.