Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98501
Received: 22/10/2019
Respondent: Elspeth Evans
I understand that there has been, an application for a gravel pit on the northern outskirts Haddiscoe.
The Norfolk Core Strategy and Minerals and Waste Development Management Plan Document 2010 - 2026 Development Management Policy DM12, requires that the amenity of people in close proximity to potential minerals extraction should be protected.
It should be noted that a large proportion of the residents of the village of Haddiscoe live within 1 K of the proposed workings.
I wish to protest that in my opinion this is an inappropriate siting for such gravel/sand extraction.
There are several reasons for the inappropriateness of this positioning, not least of which is the increased pollution that such workings are bound to engender.
I note that in January 2013 planning permission for a similar operation was denied. One reason given; " The proposed development would *adversely, affect the amenities of nearby residents due to the increased noise, dust and traffic that would arise from the proposed quarry. This is contrary to Policy DM 12 of the Norfolk Core Strate.gy and Minerals and Waste Development Management Policies Development Plan Document 2010 - 2016 and paragraph 144 of the National Planning Policy Framework."
How would the operator plan to mitigate the environmental impact on the health of the nearby residents from the inevitable increase of noise, dust and road use?
I note that although recommendations for dust mitigation incudes the use of bowsers or sprays; one must bear in mind:-
a) the impact on local water supplies, and
b) the sensible use water in these days of increased drought risk added to the fact the Water Boards advise the population overall to preserve every drop.
The increased pollution by the use of vehicles, many of which will be heavy goods vehicles, along the little country lanes concerned, is not conducive to the well being of the residents. The roads are not built for this sort of traffic, several currently being little more than one vehicle width and subsequently frequently used by cyclists and pedestrians who would find this sudden increase in traffic threatening.
The proposed works should meet "the diverse needs of all the people, and provide prosperity and opportunities for all, and in which environmental and social costs for on those who impose them."
However, it would appear that the impact will be upon the residents of Haddiscoe and not on the applicants.
There is an increased risk that such operations would have an unacceptable adverse impact on both the environment and human health, from noise, dust, visual intrusion, increased traffic, (particularly heavy goods vehicles), ground stability and the migration of contamination from the site. If one takes into account the cumulative effect of such operations on the nearby residents and their health, this proposal surely should not be granted and I wish to register my strong objection to such plans.
I understand that there has been, an application for a gravel pit on the northern outskirts Haddiscoe.
The Norfolk Core Strategy and Minerals and Waste Development Management Plan Document 2010 - 2026 Development Management Policy DM12, requires that the amenity of people in close proximity to potential minerals extraction should be protected.
It should be noted that a large proportion of the residents of the village of Haddiscoe live within 1 K of the proposed workings.
I wish to protest that in my opinion this is an inappropriate siting for such gravel/sand extraction.
There are several reasons for the inappropriateness of this positioning, not least of which is the increased pollution that such workings are bound to engender.
I note that in January 2013 planning permission for a similar operation was denied. One reason given; " The proposed development would *adversely, affect the amenities of nearby residents due to the increased noise, dust and traffic that would arise from the proposed quarry. This is contrary to Policy DM 12 of the Norfolk Core Strate.gy and Minerals and Waste Development Management Policies Development Plan Document 2010 - 2016 and paragraph 144 of the National Planning Policy Framework."
How would the operator plan to mitigate the environmental impact on the health of the nearby residents from the inevitable increase of noise, dust and road use?
I note that although recommendations for dust mitigation incudes the use of bowsers or sprays; one must bear in mind:-
a) the impact on local water supplies, and
b) the sensible use water in these days of increased drought risk added to the fact the Water Boards advise the population overall to preserve every drop.
The increased pollution by the use of vehicles, many of which will be heavy goods vehicles, along the little country lanes concerned, is not conducive to the well being of the residents. The roads are not built for this sort of traffic, several currently being little more than one vehicle width and subsequently frequently used by cyclists and pedestrians who would find this sudden increase in traffic threatening.
The proposed works should meet ''the diverse needs of all the people, and provide prosperity and opportunities for all, and in which environmental and social costs for on those who impose them." However, it would appear that the impact will be upon the residents of Haddiscoe and not on the applicants.
There is an increased risk that such operations. would have an unacceptable adverse impact on both the environment and human health, from noise, dust, visual intrusion, increased traffic, (particularly heavy goods vehicles), ground stability and the migration of contamination from the site. If one takes into account the cumulative effect of such operations on the nearby residents and their health, this proposal surely should not be granted and I wish to register my strong objection to such plans.