Object

Representation ID: 99115

Received: 09/11/2022

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Downing

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

M25.9 gives the reason planning was refused and the appeal in 2014 was rejected was due to the proposed development South of the B1136. However, this is incorrect. Evidence provided by Simon Smith (Planning NCC) in 2014 gives refusal including on the grounds of "The landscape and visual impact of the proposed development, including the construction of artificial bunds and land raised areas would be detrimental to the appearance and rural character of the area" and "the proposed development would adversely affect the amenities of nearby residents due to increased noise, dust and traffic that would arise from the proposed quarry" which applies to the area as a WHOLE not just to the proximity to St Mary's Church".
I cannot see where anything has changed! The proposal landscaping, IF and when done, will still adversely affect the area.
The proposal will have a detrimental effect on residents in the village with their health and mental wellbeing due to the increased noise and pollutants from the diggers and loaders dealing with the sifting/movements/shaking of the sand and stones etc along with the traffic and additional pollution from the 80 HGV movements each day and the loud reversing bleepers.
The village and residents have everything to LOSE and nothing to gain whatsoever from this proposal. All properties will inevitably be down valued considerably, and this will have a huge detrimental effect and impact on the residents and their families' stability, lives and future. This could potentially result in the village failing and negatively affecting the future of the village.
Soundness test: Not positively prepared