Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98608
Received: 23/10/2019
Respondent: Mr Frankie Arndt
Re: Objections to Min74, 76, 77 and 206 and ASOI and ASOJ
I object to the new quarry plans Norfolk County Council have put forward in the revised Norfolk Minerals and Waste Local Plan which include the above sites.
As a parishioner of Tottenhill I am concerned about the impact these proposals will have upon the village where I have lived for 43 years.
Permanent loss of agricultural land will impact on rural Norfolk at a time when we need to produce more home grown produce. Especially as our population increases and we are told to reduce transportation of produce.
According to Public Health Profile 2018 our villages have higher levels of respiratory problems and reduced respiratory functions. Silica particles in the air will exacerbate these conditions.
We are encouraged to exercise more for our health and wellbeing. As there are no footpaths in the village (apart from a short path on the A134 to the school) people use Deals Lane and Priors Road for walking and exercising their dogs. I regularly use this lane with my husband and grandchildren as recreation. However, the landscape will be destroyed and instead of peace, quiet and birdsong there will be noise and air pollution.
I am also concerned that if the developments are passed there is a lack of restoration plans. This village already has many quarry sites which have resulted in large areas of open water which do not enhance the village in any way. Any future landscaping would take years and the village would suffer a devastating industrial landscape. Sibelco has a poor record of restoration and has failed to ensure safety after extraction - Bawsey, cause of deaths by drowning.
The excess traffic on the A10 will make travelling on this road even worse. I use this road for work which can take me 45 minutes plus to travel 11 miles to work. With extra traffic already earmarked because of the Safari Park and developments at West Winch, not to mention the sugarbeet lorries, the situation would become intolerable. Emergency vehicles already struggle to get through - again what consideration is there for those in need. Also Oakwood Corner and the Wormegay turning at Wormegay School are already known black spots.
There is also great concern for children attending Wormegay School. We are encouraged to walk or cycle instead of using our cars for the school run. Cycling to school is a non starter for those living in Tottenhill as there is a danger of being dragged under lorries travelling on the A10. Also children using the footpath can easily be blown to the side by passing lorries. Just imagine what this is like in inclement weather. I have also witnessed near misses when cars are trying to turn right from the A134 to go to school. Vehicles often have to stand for long periods waiting for passing traffic before they can turn and are vulnerable to traffic from behind. Although there is a speed limit it is often exceeded and there in no crossing for the children to use.
If there proposals go through Tottenhill will be surrounded by quarries. Resident's health and wellbeing will suffer. Although some may want to move, there may be a devaluation of properties and who would want to live in such a village?
On a personal level my family has enjoyed the tranquility of this parish for many years. Four generations have used and still use these lanes for our health and wellbeing. Other footpaths which we had access to were taken away from us by the landowner and now form part of his agricultural land. For somebody who wants to promote the protection of wildlife, what has happened to the protection of our rural communities?
Please record this as my object
Re: Objections to Min74, 76, 77 and 206 and ASOI and ASOJ
I object to the new quarry plans Norfolk County Council have put forward in the revised Norfolk Minerals and Waste Local Plan which include the above sites.
As a parishioner of Tottenhill I am concerned about the impact these proposals will have upon the village where I have lived for 43 years.
Permanent loss of agricultural land will impact on rural Norfolk at a time when we need to produce more home grown produce. Especially as our population increases and we are told to reduce transportation of produce.
According to Public Health Profile 2018 our villages have higher levels of respiratory problems and reduced respiratory functions. Silica particles in the air will exacerbate these conditions.
We are encouraged to exercise more for our health and wellbeing. As there are no footpaths in the village (apart from a short path on the A134 to the school) people use Deals Lane and Priors Road for walking and exercising their dogs. I regularly use this lane with my husband and grandchildren as recreation. However, the landscape will be destroyed and instead of peace, quiet and birdsong there will be noise and air pollution.
I am also concerned that if the developments are passed there is a lack of restoration plans. This village already has many quarry sites which have resulted in large areas of open water which do not enhance the village in any way. Any future landscaping would take years and the village would suffer a devastating industrial landscape. Sibelco has a poor record of restoration and has failed to ensure safety after extraction - Bawsey, cause of deaths by drowning.
The excess traffic on the A10 will make travelling on this road even worse. I use this road for work which can take me 45 minutes plus to travel 11 miles to work. With extra traffic already earmarked because of the Safari Park and developments at West Winch, not to mention the sugarbeet lorries, the situation would become intolerable. Emergency vehicles already struggle to get through - again what consideration is there for those in need. Also Oakwood Corner and the Wormegay turning at Wormegay School are already known black spots.
There is also great concern for children attending Wormegay School. We are encouraged to walk or cycle instead of using our cars for the school run. Cycling to school is a non starter for those living in Tottenhill as there is a danger of being dragged under lorries travelling on the A10. Also children using the footpath can easily be blown to the side by passing lorries. Just imagine what this is like in inclement weather. I have also witnessed near misses when cars are trying to turn right from the A134 to go to school. Vehicles often have to stand for long periods waiting for passing traffic before they can turn and are vulnerable to traffic from behind. Although there is a speed limit it is often exceeded and there in no crossing for the children to use.
If there proposals go through Tottenhill will be surrounded by quarries. Resident's health and wellbeing will suffer. Although some may want to move, there may be a devaluation of properties and who would want to live in such a village?
On a personal level my family has enjoyed the tranquility of this parish for many years. Four generations have used and still use these lanes for our health and wellbeing. Other footpaths which we had access to were taken away from us by the landowner and now form part of his agricultural land. For somebody who wants to promote the protection of wildlife, what has happened to the protection of our rural communities?
Please record this as my object