MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93243
Received: 21/09/2019
Respondent: Cranworth parish council
Agent: Ms H Frary
Cranworth Parish Council strongly agree with the assessment conclusion in paragraph MIN116.22 that this site is unsuitable for the four reasons given. The Parish Council would also strongly object to any inclusion of this site in the Norfolk Minerals and Waste Local Plan.
Cranworth Parish Council strongly agree with the assessment conclusion in paragraph MIN116.22 that this site is unsuitable for the four reasons given. The Parish Council would also strongly object to any inclusion of this site in the Norfolk Minerals and Waste Local Plan.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93286
Received: 23/09/2019
Respondent: Thomas Hunt
I feel this site is unsuitable due to the very narrow and inadequate roads around the site. They are at best single track.
The proposed site is in a prominent position in the area and will have a seriously detrimental impact on the visual appearance of the area.
The residents of the Hurdle Makers Cottage (who have lived there for nearly 50 years) will suffer seriously from noise and dust pollution as they are a stones throw from the proposed site.
I feel this site is unsuitable due to the very narrow and inadequate roads around the site. They are at best single track.
The proposed site is in a prominent position in the area and will have a seriously detrimental impact on the visual appearance of the area.
The residents of the Hurdle Makers Cottage (who have lived there for nearly 50 years) will suffer seriously from noise and dust pollution as they are a stones throw from the proposed site.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93536
Received: 25/09/2019
Respondent: Mr & Mrs T Hunt
Number of people: 2
You say our house is located within 250 metres of the site MIN 116, indeed it is 48 paces from our own back door to the edge of the site and that's not even walking in a straight line and partly in our garden. I was shocked when I saw the highlighted site because of its proximity to our house!
I would like to point out the roads around the site are very narrow, it's bad enough meeting another car let alone a lorry or two lorries meeting -
The site is partly surrounded by seven houses, and it is part of the Woodrising shoot - it is teeming with wildlife - deer, hares, pheasants, partridges - frogs, newts - buzzards, kites and small birds. It is barely a field away from out medieval church in Woodrising with its protected population of bats; and not far from the recently opened Breckland Crematorium so there will be an increasing amount of funeral traffic in the area.
We think it would have a detrimental impact on the area - let alone on our peace and quiet etc at the Hurdlemakers Cottage and therefore we strongly object.
Thank you for your letter welcoming comments about the proposed mineral extraction sites contained in the Preferred Options document.
You say our house is located within 250 metres of the site MIN 116, indeed it is 48 paces from our own back door to the edge of the site and that's not even walking in a straight line and partly in our garden. I was shocked when I saw the highlighted site because of its proximity to our house!
I would like to point out the roads around the site are very narrow, it's bad enough meeting another car let alone a lorry or two lorries meeting -
The site is partly surrounded by seven houses, and it is part of the Woodrising shoot - it is teeming with wildlife - deer, hares, pheasants, partridges - frogs, newts - buzzards, kites and small birds. It is barely a field away from out medieval church in Woodrising with its protected population of bats; and not far from the recently opened Breckland Crematorium so there will be an increasing amount of funeral traffic in the area.
We think it would have a detrimental impact on the area - let alone on our peace and quiet etc at the Hurdlemakers Cottage and therefore we strongly object.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93644
Received: 07/10/2019
Respondent: Mrs Jo Oxley
As a resident of Woodrising for some 9+ years I have grave reservations regarding the proposed Gravel Extraction plan MIN116 for the following reasons.
1: The proposed extraction area is in the middle of an attractive rural setting. As stated it is above the water table level. This means, however, that it is on a raised area within the gentle rolling landscape. Bunding around the gravel pit would not hide it.
2. It has no suitable access roads. I can say, from experience, that I have had to have 6 new windscreens in the years I have been a resident in Woodrising due to the poor and degenerative condition of the narrow lanes from Woodrising to the main road - specifically to the B1108. I have also been driven off this road by a contractors' lorry who did not concede, slow down or stop. On many parts of this road there are large drainage ditches and culverts. I was extremely lucky not to end up in the ditch. There are, already, some passing places (with extremely large holes) which we residents use where possible. I think that it is naive to assume that creating more would solve the safety issue. It is also a favourite cycle route for the ever increasing number of people wishing to increase and/or maintain their fitness. Woodrising road an unclassified or C road of some 3.8 miles. It has no pavement, no edge and is of poor structure, already under considerable pressure from the agricultural vehicles. It is not wide enough for a lorry to pass a car safely.
3. As a small community with no facilities at all; no play area for children, no pavements and no bus service, any increase in large vehicles would simply add to the already dangerous conditions for those forced to walk, cycle, and ride along these lanes. The bridleway and restricted by-way is our only local access to the countryside and is used regularly by dog walkers, horse riders and people with young children. . Fadens' Map of 1797 and an Ordinance Survey of 1847 clearly show footpaths and Bridleways at Woodrising which have been removed within the last 50 years and the public denied access to these historic rights of way.
4. We have a diverse range and number of wild animals who call this rural area 'home'. I have seen, whilst on my walks from Woodrising around the circular walk, many animals, including a herd of 9 red deer, a down of 13+ hares on the proposed site, Hobbys and Barn Owls who hunt over the site and Skylarks who nest there. The area has, in the last few weeks, been striped of its' headlands and the seeds from the abundant and diverse wild flora burnt off.
Whilst I appreciate the need for aggregates, I would argue that equal consideration should be given to the ever dwindling areas of true rural habitat. The suggestion that all will be returned to agricultural land is of little consolation to the residents both human and animal. There are really very few places, even in Norfolk, where one can see a herd of red deer in the wild or Hobbys, Kites and Barn Owls. Once dispossessed they will not have sufficient hunting land to sustain their numbers.
This by no means is an exhaustive list.
I strongly object to the proposal of MIN116.
As a resident of Woodrising for some 9+ years I have grave reservations regarding the proposed Gravel Extraction plan MIN116 for the following reasons.
1: The proposed extraction area is in the middle of an attractive rural setting. As stated it is above the water table level. This means, however, that it is on a raised area within the gentle rolling landscape. Bunding around the gravel pit would not hide it.
2. It has no suitable access roads. I can say, from experience, that I have had to have 6 new windscreens in the years I have been a resident in Woodrising due to the poor and degenerative condition of the narrow lanes from Woodrising to the main road - specifically to the B1108. I have also been driven off this road by a contractors' lorry who did not concede, slow down or stop. On many parts of this road there are large drainage ditches and culverts. I was extremely lucky not to end up in the ditch. There are, already, some passing places (with extremely large holes) which we residents use where possible. I think that it is naive to assume that creating more would solve the safety issue. It is also a favourite cycle route for the ever increasing number of people wishing to increase and/or maintain their fitness. Woodrising road an unclassified or C road of some 3.8 miles. It has no pavement, no edge and is of poor structure, already under considerable pressure from the agricultural vehicles. It is not wide enough for a lorry to pass a car safely.
3. As a small community with no facilities at all; no play area for children, no pavements and no bus service, any increase in large vehicles would simply add to the already dangerous conditions for those forced to walk, cycle, and ride along these lanes. The bridleway and restricted by-way is our only local access to the countryside and is used regularly by dog walkers, horse riders and people with young children. . Fadens' Map of 1797 and an Ordinance Survey of 1847 clearly show footpaths and Bridleways at Woodrising which have been removed within the last 50 years and the public denied access to these historic rights of way.
4. We have a diverse range and number of wild animals who call this rural area 'home'. I have seen, whilst on my walks from Woodrising around the circular walk, many animals, including a herd of 9 red deer, a down of 13+ hares on the proposed site, Hobbys and Barn Owls who hunt over the site and Skylarks who nest there. The area has, in the last few weeks, been striped of its' headlands and the seeds from the abundant and diverse wild flora burnt off.
Whilst I appreciate the need for aggregates, I would argue that equal consideration should be given to the ever dwindling areas of true rural habitat. The suggestion that all will be returned to agricultural land is of little consolation to the residents both human and animal. There are really very few places, even in Norfolk, where one can see a herd of red deer in the wild or Hobbys, Kites and Barn Owls. Once dispossessed they will not have sufficient hunting land to sustain their numbers.
This by no means is an exhaustive list.
I strongly object to the proposal of MIN116.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93722
Received: 04/10/2019
Respondent: Ms Deborah Hardy
I strongly object to the proposal to extract mineral from the land at Woodrising Rd, Cranworth (Min 116) for the following reasons:
The land is bordered by a bridleway and adjacent to a restricted byway which form a circular route with adjacent lanes for local walkers, horseriders and cyclists. This route remains the only local off road access to the countryside and is widely used by locals from Woodrising, Southburgh and Hingham. Mineral extraction would completely spoil the environment and render it useless for public amenity purpose.
The lanes adjacent to the site (unmarked lane known as Grove Lane or Peters Lane locally), Pye Lane, River Lane and Woodrising Rd are all narrow and poorly maintained. In many places there is only room for a single car to pass slowly without forcing walkers up onto banks,ditch edges or hedgerows. It is already hazardous for walkers, riders and cyclists when any vehicle passes and the conditions are wholly unsuited to large, heavy gravel lorries. All the lanes are lined with mature oak trees and typical of rural communities, there are no pavements. Widening the roads would detract from the rural character of the area and involve destruction of useful wildlife habitat.
Whilst the application states that vehicles would travel along Woodrising Rd towards Hingham, I submit this claim is disingenuous. The reality is that large heavy vehicles would filter through the local lanes to Woodrising Village, through Southburgh and onto Cranworth. No lorry headed towards Dereham is likely to travel through Hingham when there are equally inadequate and more direct routes elsewhere. Most of the local housing dates back to the early 1800s and is built of clay lump on brick plinths without modern foundations. The risk to the integrity of these buildings with heavy vehicles passing, even at moderate speeds, (in the case of my home) within approx 15 feet of the front door should be considered.
The proposed site has, until recently, been surrounded by broad grassy headlands. As a regular walker I can testify to the presence of Kites, Barn Owls, Hobbys, Buzzards, Skylarks, Deer, Hare and a proliferation of wildflowers and grasses beside the bridleway and the restricted byway, Gypsy Lane. Hence the attraction of the site to local walkers and riders. Again, this habitat/flora and fauna would be threatened by the site.
The essential character of the whole area is that of rural, agricultural countryside. There are attractive views towards Southburgh church and across the fields to the extensive woodlands of the Woodrising Estate and the Blackwater valley/water meadows. The headlands/hedges of the fields form essential wildlife corridors. Effectively dropping an industrial mineral extraction site into the area and claiming that a bund/hedges would protect 'the view' from local properties is unreasonable.
It is further claimed that dust/noise from the site would only affect properties within 250m of the area. Given that on occasions dust from the sahara falls on Norfolk, and seeing the extent of snow drift across the fields during periods of extreme weather ( effectively blocking the Woodrising Rd on more than one occasion in the 13 years I have lived here), I feel strongly that the consequences of mineral extraction would be far more impactful on local communities than admitted by the landowner.
My last issue is that it is apparent that many local people who would be affected by the development of the site remain unaware of these proposals. A small number of local residents are trying to address this through personal contact, but time is pressing.
I strongly object to the proposal to extract mineral from the land at Woodrising Rd, Cranworth (Min 116) for the following reasons:
The land is bordered by a bridleway and adjacent to a restricted byway which form a circular route with adjacent lanes for local walkers, horseriders and cyclists. This route remains the only local off road access to the countryside and is widely used by locals from Woodrising, Southburgh and Hingham. Mineral extraction would completely spoil the environment and render it useless for public amenity purpose.
The lanes adjacent to the site (unmarked lane known as Grove Lane or Peters Lane locally), Pye Lane, River Lane and Woodrising Rd are all narrow and poorly maintained. In many places there is only room for a single car to pass slowly without forcing walkers up onto banks,ditch edges or hedgerows. It is already hazardous for walkers, riders and cyclists when any vehicle passes and the conditions are wholly unsuited to large, heavy gravel lorries. All the lanes are lined with mature oak trees and typical of rural communities, there are no pavements. Widening the roads would detract from the rural character of the area and involve destruction of useful wildlife habitat.
Whilst the application states that vehicles would travel along Woodrising Rd towards Hingham, I submit this claim is disingenuous. The reality is that large heavy vehicles would filter through the local lanes to Woodrising Village, through Southburgh and onto Cranworth. No lorry headed towards Dereham is likely to travel through Hingham when there are equally inadequate and more direct routes elsewhere. Most of the local housing dates back to the early 1800s and is built of clay lump on brick plinths without modern foundations. The risk to the integrity of these buildings with heavy vehicles passing, even at moderate speeds, (in the case of my home) within approx 15 feet of the front door should be considered.
The proposed site has, until recently, been surrounded by broad grassy headlands. As a regular walker I can testify to the presence of Kites, Barn Owls, Hobbys, Buzzards, Skylarks, Deer, Hare and a proliferation of wildflowers and grasses beside the bridleway and the restricted byway, Gypsy Lane. Hence the attraction of the site to local walkers and riders. Again, this habitat/flora and fauna would be threatened by the site.
The essential character of the whole area is that of rural, agricultural countryside. There are attractive views towards Southburgh church and across the fields to the extensive woodlands of the Woodrising Estate and the Blackwater valley/water meadows. The headlands/hedges of the fields form essential wildlife corridors. Effectively dropping an industrial mineral extraction site into the area and claiming that a bund/hedges would protect 'the view' from local properties is unreasonable.
It is further claimed that dust/noise from the site would only affect properties within 250m of the area. Given that on occasions dust from the sahara falls on Norfolk, and seeing the extent of snow drift across the fields during periods of extreme weather ( effectively blocking the Woodrising Rd on more than one occasion in the 13 years I have lived here), I feel strongly that the consequences of mineral extraction would be far more impactful on local communities than admitted by the landowner.
My last issue is that it is apparent that many local people who would be affected by the development of the site remain unaware of these proposals. A small number of local residents are trying to address this through personal contact, but time is pressing.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93814
Received: 05/10/2019
Respondent: Miss Kelly Freeman
The roads around this site are not suitable for such an increase in heavy goods traffic, with limited passing places and no footpaths. I regularly use this public bridal way to walk my dog and daughter in a pushchair, I would consider it unsafe to do this with vehicles to negotiate, leaving me limited with places to walk from my home nearby as there are no paths. The road conditions are already poor with pot holes and blocked drains which are already unable to be maintained by the council, more traffic would further increase the damage.
The roads around this site are not suitable for such an increase in heavy goods traffic, with limited passing places and no footpaths. I regularly use this public bridal way to walk my dog and daughter in a pushchair, I would consider it unsafe to do this with vehicles to negotiate, leaving me limited with places to walk from my home nearby as there are no paths. The road conditions are already poor with pot holes and blocked drains which are already unable to be maintained by the council, more traffic would further increase the damage.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93858
Received: 07/10/2019
Respondent: Mrs Jane Lowe
We live in a property that backs onto the proposed site and were appalled to read of this idea. The roads in the vicinity are single track and there have already been many concerns raised at parish council meetings about the danger of increased traffic. This proposal would mean a totally unacceptable increase in traffic and noise to the road which would put lives of people and animals in danger.
Our house and outbuildings are of clay lump construction and therefore have substandard foundations - interference to the land around would potentially unsteady our foundations. Our area is peaceful and the noise of the countryside is why we live here - the proposed gravel pit would change the whole sound of the neighbourhood and interfere with wildlife. Our beautiful rural view would be obliterated as this would be clearly visible from our property and garden. This would have a long term impact on our lives and would be totally unacceptable. We would fight this to the bitter end using every inch of the law....
Destroying rural villages
Changing the character of the area which has been unchanged for centuries
We live in a property that backs onto the proposed site and were appalled to read of this idea. The roads in the vicinity are single track and there have already been many concerns raised at parish council meetings about the danger of increased traffic. This proposal would mean a totally unacceptable increase in traffic and noise to the road which would put lives of people and animals in danger.
Our house and outbuildings are of clay lump construction and therefore have substandard foundations - interference to the land around would potentially unsteady our foundations. Our area is peaceful and the noise of the countryside is why we live here - the proposed gravel pit would change the whole sound of the neighbourhood and interfere with wildlife. Our beautiful rural view would be obliterated as this would be clearly visible from our property and garden. This would have a long term impact on our lives and would be totally unacceptable. We would fight this to the bitter end using every inch of the law....
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93859
Received: 07/10/2019
Respondent: Mr Ian Lowe
I live next to this proposed site and strongly object to it. The roads in the vicinity are single track and are wholly unsuited to bringing industrial traffic into the area. The increased traffic of large vehicles would be highly dangerous for the residents and local wildlife.
It is a historical area with many of the houses being built in the traditional clay lump or flint construction and therefore have substandard foundations - interference to the land around from mining and heavy goods vehicles would potentially unsteady foundations. Our area is peaceful and the noise of the countryside is why we live here - the proposed gravel pit would change the whole sound of the neighbourhood and interfere with wildlife. We have many rare species which would be directly affected by these plans including nesting red kites. Our beautiful rural country site will be obliterated as this would be clearly visible from many roads and would destroy the peace of the footpath which is used daily by many dog walkers and horse riders . This would have a long term impact on our lives, the landscape and wildlife of this ancient area... totally unsuitable.
What will be used to fill the massive hole after 20 years for digging... Landfill Site??!!
I live next to this proposed site and strongly object to it. The roads in the vicinity are single track and are wholly unsuited to bringing industrial traffic into the area. The increased traffic of large vehicles would be highly dangerous for the residents and local wildlife.
It is a historical area with many of the houses being built in the traditional clay lump or flint construction and therefore have substandard foundations - interference to the land around from mining and heavy goods vehicles would potentially unsteady foundations. Our area is peaceful and the noise of the countryside is why we live here - the proposed gravel pit would change the whole sound of the neighbourhood and interfere with wildlife. We have many rare species which would be directly affected by these plans including nesting red kites. Our beautiful rural country site will be obliterated as this would be clearly visible from many roads and would destroy the peace of the footpath which is used daily by many dog walkers and horse riders . This would have a long term impact on our lives, the landscape and wildlife of this ancient area... totally unsuitable.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93930
Received: 08/10/2019
Respondent: Mrs R Bunning
I would like to object to this proposal because I feel it would have an adverse effect on the village in terms of the visual impact and the amount of traffic it would bring to a very inadequate roads network in the village. Woodrising is a unique medieval village and deserves to be preserved as it is.
I WOULD LIKE TO OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSAL BECAUSE I FEEL IT WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE VILLAGE IN TERMS OF THE VISUAL IMPACT AND THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IT WOULD BRING TO A VERY INADEQUATE ROADS NETWORK IN THE VILLAGE. WOODRISING IS A UNIQUE MEDIEVAL VILLAGE AND DESERVES TO BE PRESERVED AS IT IS.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 93941
Received: 08/10/2019
Respondent: Mrs Josephine Lindner
I wish to object strongly to the proposal for gravel extraction in Cranworth, and therefore support the findings of the site assessment. This site is extremely unsuitable for any heavy traffic, and the visual and character impacts of such extraction would be devastating to the local area. I wholly agree with the assessment findings that this area is unsuitable, and hope that these reasons are upheld in decision making.
I wish to object strongly to the proposal for gravel extraction in Cranworth, and therefore support the findings of the site assessment. This site is extremely unsuitable for any heavy traffic, and the visual and character impacts of such extraction would be devastating to the local area. I wholly agree with the assessment findings that this area is unsuitable, and hope that these reasons are upheld in decision making.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 94355
Received: 18/10/2019
Respondent: Mr Jonathan Storey
Site MIN116 - proposed gravel and sand extraction site at Woodrising Road Southburgh/Cranworth
I would like to object to the proposed site as.
I think it unlikely that noise levels will be unchanged in a very rural area.
MIN 116.8
We would have some visual intrusion "of a lesser magnitude" than some, but anticipate some from the house.
It would be sad to see the large old oak trees removed from the landscape. I notice some trees and scrub have already been cleared nearby but not on the particular area proposed. I note wildlife field boundaries that have been established several years have been removed already.
The acknowledged impact on the roads locally will be a major change for the area. I would anticipate lots of verge damage and some hedgerows going to allow passing places. I note the proposed route for lorries, but would this be their exclusive route, or would they use any of the other routes out of the area to access other directions eg Dereham? All roads are narrow with many being single track. All are used by cyclists, horses, walkers all day every day whatever the weather, as well as traffic of course.
The major impact on the landscape in undeniable, and will extend beyond the site itself.
We walk and ride there daily and would find site traffic prohibitive in getting to and using the right of way we presently enjoy, not to mention anticipating riding past the site boundary being dangerous and difficult.
re site MIN116 - proposed gravel and sand extraction site at Woodrising Road Southburgh/Cranworth
I would like to object to the proposed site as.
I think it unlikely that noise levels will be unchanged in a very rural area.
MIN 116.8
We would have some visual intrusion "of a lesser magnitude" than some, but anticipate some from the house.
It would be sad to see the large old oak trees removed from the landscape. I notice some trees and scrub have already been cleared nearby but not on the particular area proposed. I note wildlife field boundaries that have been established several years have been removed already.
The acknowledged impact on the roads locally will be a major change for the area. I would anticipate lots of verge damage and some hedgerows going to allow passing places. I note the proposed route for lorries, but would this be their exclusive route, or would they use any of the other routes out of the area to access other directions eg Dereham? All roads are narrow with many being single track. All are used by cyclists, horses, walkers all day every day whatever the weather, as well as traffic of course.
The major impact on the landscape in undeniable, and will extend beyond the site itself.
We walk and ride there daily and would find site traffic prohibitive in getting to and using the right of way we presently enjoy, not to mention anticipating riding past the site boundary being dangerous and difficult.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 94690
Received: 27/10/2019
Respondent: Mr Andrew Gunton
I object to the proposed site and I fully support the initial conclusion. We shouldn't waste anymore taxpayers money on this proposal and make it the final conclusion.
Visual and amenity impact on the nearby dwellings would be unacceptable;
* Local landscape impacts would be unacceptable;
* The Highway Authority has raised concerns regarding the proposed highway access because the local road network is sub-standard and narrow. Woodrising Road would require widening and a right turn lane would be required at its junction with the B1108 to be made acceptable.
* There is not a mineral operator promoting the proposed site and therefore the site is less deliverable than other sites that have been proposed for extraction.
Adding to this pollution from Dust, Noise and Vibration. Loss of countryside and safety of our roads.
I object to the proposed site and I fully support the initial conclusion. We shouldn't waste anymore taxpayers money on this proposal and make it the final conclusion.
Visual and amenity impact on the nearby dwellings would be unacceptable;
* Local landscape impacts would be unacceptable;
* The Highway Authority has raised concerns regarding the proposed highway access because the local road network is sub-standard and narrow. Woodrising Road would require widening and a right turn lane would be required at its junction with the B1108 to be made acceptable.
* There is not a mineral operator promoting the proposed site and therefore the site is less deliverable than other sites that have been proposed for extraction.
Adding to this pollution from Dust, Noise and Vibration. Loss of countryside and safety of our roads.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95475
Received: 02/10/2019
Respondent: Mr Philip Gale
I live in River Lane in Southburgh I have found out that you propose to excavate a gravel pit on Woodrising Road Quoting site MIN116.
This would be a disaster to the environment and wiled life in the local area the amount of trucks van and trailers traveling down all the roads in the local vicinity will just make them more and more undriveable with more potholes that don't get fixed.
The dust in the summer the noise pollution also you don't move into the countryside to have a sand and gravel pit on your doorstep which I'm sure in the future will turn into a dump to fill the hole back in in years to come. please do not do this to the local environment wildlife and residence.
I move from Dereham 4 years ago to have a peaceful quite life for my children so they new what the country side is all about so they respect it when they grow up and you are thinking of doing this.
I live in River Lane in Southburgh I have found out that you propose to excavate a gravel pit on Woodrising Road Quoting site MIN116.
This would be a disaster to the environment and wiled life in the local area the amount of trucks van and trailers traveling down all the roads in the local vicinity will just make them more and more undriveable with more potholes that don't get fixed.
The dust in the summer the noise pollution also you don't move into the countryside to have a sand and gravel pit on your doorstep which I'm sure in the future will turn into a dump to fill the hole back in in years to come. please do not do this to the local environment wildlife and residence.
I move from Dereham 4 years ago to have a peaceful quite life for my children so they new what the country side is all about so they respect it when they grow up and you are thinking of doing this.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95481
Received: 09/10/2019
Respondent: Mrs C Langham
Having recently seen the notice for excavation site MIN 116, I strongly object as the roads within the vicinity are not adequate for HGV vehicles, there is insufficient width to pass a lorry and car as it is difficult for two cars to pass. If those some lorries come into Cranworth then Shipdham onto the main Watton Road the junction at which they would turn regularly has vehicles taking the bollards and part of the property with it. The church bends have continuous damage because of the passing of larger vehicles. If they go through and come out the Shipdham Airfield Road, this is a busy road which they would have to exit onto, turning right into Toftwood which is already a busy congested road and with the intended housing developments will only get worse, and turning left will again bring them to the church beds in Shipdham. The site may well have the gravel etc but everything leading to it is inadequate. Drivers ignore sat navs (which also give false information) and in doing so have frequently blocked roads, both Hingham and Shipdham are rural villages and as such the infrastructure only meets these basic needs. Much road improvements would have to be given to allow the lorries the use but this would still not stop the noise (which carries far in the countryside), dust and loss of visual countryside views, together with the freedom of walkways and bridlepaths and wildlife.
Having recently seen the notice for excavation site MIN 116, I strongly object as the roads within the vicinity are not adequate for HGV vehicles, there is insufficient width to pass a lorry and car as it is difficult for two cars to pass. If those some lorries come into Cranworth then Shipdham onto the main Watton Road the junction at which they would turn regularly has vehicles taking the bollards and part of the property with it. The church bends have continuous damage because of the passing of larger vehicles. If they go through and come out the Shipdham Airfield Road, this is a busy road which they would have to exit onto, turning right into Toftwood which is already a busy congested road and with the intended housing developments will only get worse, and turning left will again bring them to the church beds in Shipdham. The site may well have the gravel etc but everything leading to it is inadequate. Drivers ignore sat navs (which also give false information) and in doing so have frequently blocked roads, both Hingham and Shipdham are rural villages and as such the infrastructure only meets these basic needs. Much road improvements would have to be given to allow the lorries the use but this would still not stop the noise (which carries far in the countryside), dust and loss of visual countryside views, together with the freedom of walkways and bridlepaths and wildlife.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95482
Received: 09/10/2019
Respondent: Ms Suzette Leske
I am writing to log my concerns with MIN116 proposed gravel pit site at Woodrising.
The roads are single track and unsuitable for multiple large lorries. There are already a large number of farm machines using these narrow country roads and I have had to reverse to find passing points or mount the verge to allow them past.
Trying to pass large farm vehicles , is itself difficult but two large vehicle will be impossible .
Please don't allow this planning application go through
I am writing to log my concerns with MIN116 proposed gravel pit site at Woodrising.
The roads are single track and unsuitable for multiple large lorries. There are already a large number of farm machines using these narrow country roads and I have had to reverse to find passing points or mount the verge to allow them past.
Trying to pass large farm vehicles , is itself difficult but two large vehicle will be impossible .
Please don't allow this planning application go through
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95483
Received: 11/10/2019
Respondent: Ms Christine Dunnett
Proposed Sand & Gravel Quarry at Woodrising
I understand there has been an application for a Gravel and Sand Quarry on the Woodrising Road near Hingham.
I live parallel to the Woodrising Road on Pye Lane where I run my business as a Racehorse Trainer. I currently have over 25 horses in training. I regularly use the Woodrising Road to exercise my horses and it is my only access to my main gallops on the other side of Hingham where I access through my farm Rectory Farm on the Watton Road. The proposed quarry is also adjacent to a peaceful public bridle path which would certainly be gone!
The idea of an estimate of 18+ lorries per day trundling down the very narrow Woodrising Road to access the main B1108 seems ludicrous and would certainly have an impact on my business. The thought of the lorries using Pye Lane would be horrendous as it is barely wide enough for one large car !!
The Woodrising Road is a a very popular walk for dog walkers and runners from the town of Hingham and surrounding area. My family also run a small campsite and caravan park at the bottom of the Woodrising Road and the impact of many lorries would certainly also have a detrimental affect on their business. It is not even safe for 2 cars to pass let alone the thought of big artic lorries. The impact during the harvest season with massive tractors is dreadful as the machinery used is far too big for the lanes around Woodrising and Southburgh and they alone cause a lot of damage to verges etc. Thankfully this only has a short season!
I appreciate the need for quarries and gravel extraction but to position them on a small country lane with narrow lanes all around is concerning I am sure there must be more suitable sites located nearer to a main access road.
I trust you will read and take on board my comments
Proposed Sand & Gravel Quarry at Woodrising
I understand there has been an application for a Gravel and Sand Quarry on the Woodrising Road near Hingham.
I live parallel to the Woodrising Road on Pye Lane where I run my business as a Racehorse Trainer. I currently have over 25 horses in training. I regularly use the Woodrising Road to exercise my horses and it is my only access to my main gallops on the other side of Hingham where I access through my farm Rectory Farm on the Watton Road. The proposed quarry is also adjacent to a peaceful public bridle path which would certainly be gone!
The idea of an estimate of 18+ lorries per day trundling down the very narrow Woodrising Road to access the main B1108 seems ludicrous and would certainly have an impact on my business. The thought of the lorries using Pye Lane would be horrendous as it is barely wide enough for one large car !!
The Woodrising Road is a a very popular walk for dog walkers and runners from the town of Hingham and surrounding area. My family also run a small campsite and caravan park at the bottom of the Woodrising Road and the impact of many lorries would certainly also have a detrimental affect on their business. It is not even safe for 2 cars to pass let alone the thought of big artic lorries. The impact during the harvest season with massive tractors is dreadful as the machinery used is far too big for the lanes around Woodrising and Southburgh and they alone cause a lot of damage to verges etc. Thankfully this only has a short season!
I appreciate the need for quarries and gravel extraction but to position them on a small country lane with narrow lanes all around is concerning I am sure there must be more suitable sites located nearer to a main access road.
I trust you will read and take on board my comments.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95484
Received: 09/10/2019
Respondent: Ms Lesley Moores
We wish to object this is not workable the roads are too small for gravel lorries the road is not a good standard but would deteriorate quickly with these lorries? This is an arable area not a large gravel pit with noise & light nuisance
We wish to object this is not workable the roads are too small for gravel lorries the road is not a good standard but would deteriorate quickly with these lorries? This is an arable area not a large gravel pit with noise & light nuisance
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95485
Received: 11/10/2019
Respondent: Mr Mark Burns
I would like to raise my objection to the proposed gravel excavation MIN116 on Woodrising road.
As a local resident I am concerned about many aspects of this proposal which include the following:
Noise Pollution.
Dust Pollution.
Unsuitable road network for large lorries.
General upheaval of wildlife.
Loss of use for the bridal way beside the proposed site location.
I would like to raise my objection to the proposed gravel excavation MIN116 on Woodrising road.
As a local resident I am concerned about many aspects of this proposal which include the following:
Noise Pollution.
Dust Pollution.
Unsuitable road network for large lorries.
General upheaval of wildlife.
Loss of use for the bridal way beside the proposed site location.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95618
Received: 14/10/2019
Respondent: Mr & Ms Clive & Deborah Beech & Fairburn
Number of people: 2
Re the above proposed development. We are writing to object to the said proposal. We are Hingham residents and we walk/ cycle regularly around the QUIET roads of Woodrising!! Not only will this proposed development impact on our enjoyment of rural life but we are extremely concerned about the amount of traffic that may have to go through Hingham. At present the amount of cars , lorries, farm vehicles appears to have doubled since we moved here 10 years ago and we fear the impact of 18 lorries per day will not only add to the noise and disruption through our lovely village but also prove VERY hazardous to the population that includes many elderly residents and small children. Please note at present we have no safe crossing in Hingham . An added worry is that the current junction of Woodrising Road with the B1108 is already dangerous with poor visibility and we predict the proposed increase in lorries using that junction may prove to be a potential death trap.
Re proposed mineral extraction Woodrising
Re the above proposed development. We are writing to object to the said proposal. We are Hingham residents and we walk/ cycle regularly around the QUIET roads of Woodrising!! Not only will this proposed development impact on our enjoyment of rural life but we are extremely concerned about the amount of traffic that may have to go through Hingham. At present the amount of cars , lorries, farm vehicles appears to have doubled since we moved here 10 years ago and we fear the impact of 18 lorries per day will not only add to the noise and disruption through our lovely village but also prove VERY hazardous to the population that includes many elderly residents and small children. Please note at present we have no safe crossing in Hingham . An added worry is that the current junction of Woodrising Road with the B1108 is already dangerous with poor visibility and we predict the proposed increase in lorries using that junction may prove to be a potential death trap.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 95623
Received: 09/10/2019
Respondent: Ms Katrina Chapman
Site MIN116 Woodrising
I am writing to object to the application for gravel extraction at this site due to the high risk accident site. The road from the B1108 to this site is nearly single track, with 2 very sharp narrow bends and a high volume of traffic use it already so a assessment of safety should be done on the minor road in the first instance.
However my major concern in large slow moving lorries pulling into and out of the junction on the Watton Road B1108. I have lived near this junction for 28 years and it is a very high accident area, and the traffic increases as the surrounding towns development does. It has improved with the reduction of speed limit to 40 but vehicles still fly round those blind bends well in excess, and with slow vehicles pulling into that road would inevitably increase the risk of major accidents. I know it is bad driving, but unfortunately the cause does not prevent the accidents happening. Cars vans, motorbikes etc also fly out of Hingham and there is always complaints to the council to try and elevate this issue but no luck.
I actually have no issues with lorries going past on the road from Norwich to Watton as will make little impact to the road outside but I do not want to go back to pulling people out of vehicles , and attending accidents due to the large increase of HGV's using this junction. Please check with the Norfolk Police as to past issues there and the highway agency. There is also an issue with a large increase of large vehicles traveling through the centre of Hingham at the moment, and this development is only going to make life so much harder for the residents using the High Street, with the demographics of Hingham, the chemist and shops have high usage and people less able won't feel safe crossing the road.
I use the trod path most days along the B1108 and walk down Frost Row, and when crossing the road next to the junction we have to check, double check then practically run across as visibility at this spot is low , before making any decision you may wish to try crossing it a few times to fully understand how dangerous it is it . Frost Row is used by walkers, runners, cyclists etc and this tiny road would not be able to cope and be inaccessible for pedestrians, and as the site butts up to a public footpath it will make it obsolete.
Please consider all this as I really feel you need to make an assessment based on past issues and potential high risk to life.
Site MIN116 Woodrising
I am writing to object to the application for gravel extraction at this site due to the high risk accident site. The road from the B1108 to this site is nearly single track, with 2 very sharp narrow bends and a high volume of traffic use it already so a assessment of safety should be done on the minor road in the first instance.
However my major concern in large slow moving lorries pulling into and out of the junction on the Watton Road B1108. I have lived near this junction for 28 years and it is a very high accident area, and the traffic increases as the surrounding towns development does. It has improved with the reduction of speed limit to 40 but vehicles still fly round those blind bends well in excess, and with slow vehicles pulling into that road would inevitably increase the risk of major accidents. I know it is bad driving, but unfortunately the cause does not prevent the accidents happening. Cars vans, motorbikes etc also fly out of Hingham and there is always complaints to the council to try and elevate this issue but no luck.
I actually have no issues with lorries going past on the road from Norwich to Watton as will make little impact to the road outside but I do not want to go back to pulling people out of vehicles , and attending accidents due to the large increase of HGV's using this junction. Please check with the Norfolk Police as to past issues there and the highway agency. There is also an issue with a large increase of large vehicles traveling through the centre of Hingham at the moment, and this development is only going to make life so much harder for the residents using the High Street, with the demographics of Hingham, the chemist and shops have high usage and people less able won't feel safe crossing the road.
I use the trod path most days along the B1108 and walk down Frost Row, and when crossing the road next to the junction we have to check, double check then practically run across as visibility at this spot is low , before making any decision you may wish to try crossing it a few times to fully understand how dangerous it is it . Frost Row is used by walkers, runners, cyclists etc and this tiny road would not be able to cope and be inaccessible for pedestrians, and as the site butts up to a public footpath it will make it obsolete.
Please consider all this as I really feel you need to make an assessment based on past issues and potential high risk to life.
Thank you for your consideration.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98020
Received: 07/10/2019
Respondent: Rachel Marrs
re site MIN116
proposed gravel and sand extraction site at Woodrising Road Southburgh/Cranworth
I would like to express objection to the proposed site as above.
I think it unlikely that noise levels will be unchanged in a very rural area, and have concerns about this, it being a short distance away from our house and neighbours - across three fields.
MIN 116.8
We would have some visual intrusion "of a lesser magnitude" than some, but anticipate some from the house. Of course there have been recent large agricultural buildings erected which have affected the view but we have to accept that living in an agricultural area requires the infrastructure.
I would be very sad to see the large old oak trees removed from the landscape. Every oak tree provides a rich ecosystem in itself. I notice some trees and scrub have already been cleared nearby but not on the particular area proposed. Is the area proposed the excavation area, with parking etc included, or will this spill over? I note wildlife field boundaries that have been established several years have been removed already.
Will there be one access point or will vehicles access from river lane near Crown House as well? Where is the proposed access? My understanding is from the western boundary.
The acknowledged impact on the roads locally will be a major change for the area. I would anticipate lots of verge damage and some hedgerows going to allow passing places. I note the proposed route for lorries, but would this be their exclusive route, or would they use any of the other routes out of the area to access other directions eg Dereham? All roads are narrow with many being single track. All are used by cyclists, horses, walkers all day every day whatever the weather, as well as traffic of course. Lorries and vans already regularly screech to a halt diving up the verges outside our house because of the downhill section - speed combined with a slight bend reducing visibility means regular near misses. The hazard level would be significantly increased as the lorry numbers increase and of course there will be an increase in van/car numbers too. The impact will fall on the surrounding single track roads as well as the proposed lorry route - which is narrow and would be completely changed from the quiet lane it is at present.
I am really concerned about increased risk to riders, walkers and pets as well as local residents who have to drive on these very narrow roads.
The major impact on the landscape in undeniable, and will extend beyond the site itself.
We walk and ride there daily and would find the consideration of more vehicles on the roads prohibitive in getting to and using the right of way we presently enjoy, not to mention anticipating riding past the site boundary being dangerous and difficult.
I realise materials are needed and will have to be extracted from somewhere, and that eventually restoration to arable agriculture and woodland is presently proposed. However you will be aware there may be other sites with less impact on community rural activities, views, traffic and highway alterations, noise, trees and wildlife.
Thank you for your consideration.
re site MIN116
proposed gravel and sand extraction site at Woodrising Road Southburgh/Cranworth
I would like to express objection to the proposed site as above.
I think it unlikely that noise levels will be unchanged in a very rural area, and have concerns about this, it being a short distance away from our house and neighbours - across three fields.
MIN 116.8
We would have some visual intrusion "of a lesser magnitude" than some, but anticipate some from the house. Of course there have been recent large agricultural buildings erected which have affected the view but we have to accept that living in an agricultural area requires the infrastructure.
I would be very sad to see the large old oak trees removed from the landscape. Every oak tree provides a rich ecosystem in itself. I notice some trees and scrub have already been cleared nearby but not on the particular area proposed. Is the area proposed the excavation area, with parking etc included, or will this spill over? I note wildlife field boundaries that have been established several years have been removed already.
Will there be one access point or will vehicles access from river lane near Crown House as well? Where is the proposed access? My understanding is from the western boundary.
The acknowledged impact on the roads locally will be a major change for the area. I would anticipate lots of verge damage and some hedgerows going to allow passing places. I note the proposed route for lorries, but would this be their exclusive route, or would they use any of the other routes out of the area to access other directions eg Dereham? All roads are narrow with many being single track. All are used by cyclists, horses, walkers all day every day whatever the weather, as well as traffic of course. Lorries and vans already regularly screech to a halt diving up the verges outside our house because of the downhill section - speed combined with a slight bend reducing visibility means regular near misses. The hazard level would be significantly increased as the lorry numbers increase and of course there will be an increase in van/car numbers too. The impact will fall on the surrounding single track roads as well as the proposed lorry route - which is narrow and would be completely changed from the quiet lane it is at present.
I am really concerned about increased risk to riders, walkers and pets as well as local residents who have to drive on these very narrow roads.
The major impact on the landscape in undeniable, and will extend beyond the site itself.
We walk and ride there daily and would find the consideration of more vehicles on the roads prohibitive in getting to and using the right of way we presently enjoy, not to mention anticipating riding past the site boundary being dangerous and difficult.
I realise materials are needed and will have to be extracted from somewhere, and that eventually restoration to arable agriculture and woodland is presently proposed. However you will be aware there may be other sites with less impact on community rural activities, views, traffic and highway alterations, noise, trees and wildlife.
Thank you for your consideration.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98023
Received: 30/10/2019
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Catherine & Gyles Basey-Fisher
Number of people: 2
Please find attached the objections we have to the gravel pit proposed at Southburgh, which is within 250m of our property. There are multiple objections we have on all accounts;
The adverse effect of dust blowing down from the site &; travelling the short distance to our property will result in a reduction in air quality & have a negative health impact due to inhalation and or ingestion. Our main amenity space is that side of the property and we also have two young children who wish to play in the garden; the site and the above will result in a danger to their health and well being.
Noise & vibration from heavy plant and extraction activities would also easily travel the short distance between us, causing a further negative impact on our property. Our main amenity space and living accommodation is
in direct view of the site. The noise will disturb the quiet space we have paid a premium to live in.
The highway connecting the site to the B1108 is inadequate for the increased number and size of vehicles. The roads already struggle with the current volume of traffic and increasing volumes and size further (collection vehicles and operatives working on the site) would be unacceptable for such a rural community. This would cause an increased
danger to life for cyclists and walkers who also use the roads here for exercise- we have no paths to use as an alternative and lots of people travel to the neighbouring bridleway to enjoy the rural, peaceful and scenic location. It is currently a Very safe place to be, but if the gravel pit is developed, will no longer be so.
Widening the road and adding passing places would simply urbanise further the rural space and we donot want this to change. The increased traffic would also result in an increase in pollution and a reduction in air quality- again having a negative impact on health.
Loss of a large arable space= reduced agricultural self sufficiency
Loss of several established trees and the public right of way.
The visual intrusion impact on our property from this development is high, due to the location on top of a hill!
Planning additional hedging or trees to shield the site would block our views from our garden. Our house has all its windows on that side, so the extraction site would ruin 100% of our time at home. Dust would blow in all our windows and trickle vents even if we only had them slightly ajar.
SUMMARY
Dust pollution- negative health impact
Noise pollution- loss of amenity space
Vibration pollution- loss of amenity space
Visual intrusion - loss of amenity space
Unsatisfactory traffic / infrastructure links- danger to life and loss of recreational spaces and public rights of way
Reduction in air quality- increase in pollutants and dangerous mineral dusts in the air
Site visual not only to those houses in view, but also to all passers by, as the proposed site on top of a hill.
The whole site is unsustainable and intrusive on all counts and should not proceed
Please find attached the objections we have to the gravel pit proposed at Southburgh, which is within 250m of our property. There are multiple objections we have on all accounts;
The adverse effect of dust blowing down from the site &; travelling the short distance to our property will result in a reduction in air quality & have a negative health impact due to inhalation and or ingestion. Our main amenity space is that side of the property and we also have two young children who wish to play in the garden; the site and the above will result in a danger to their health and well being.
Noise & vibration from heavy plant and extraction activities would also easily travel the short distance between us, causing a further negative impact on our property. Our main amenity space and living accommodation is in direct view of the site. The noise will disturb the quiet space we have paid a premium to live in.
The highway connecting the site to the B1108 is inadequate for the increased number and size of vehicles. The roads already struggle with the current volume of traffic and increasing volumes and size further (collection vehicles and operatives working on the site) would be unacceptable for such a rural community. This would cause an increased danger to life for cyclists and walkers who also use the roads here for exercise- we have no paths to use as an alternative and lots of people travel to the neighbouring bridleway to enjoy the rural, peaceful and scenic location. It is currently a Very safe place to be, but if the gravel pit is developed, will no longer be so.
Widening the road and adding passing places would simply urbanise further
the rural space and we donot want this to change. The increased traffic would also result in an increase in pollution and a reduction in air quality- again having a negative impact on health.
Loss of a large arable space= reduced agricultural self sufficiency
Loss of several established trees and the public right of way.
The visual intrusion impact on our property from this development is high,
due to the location on top of a hill!
Planning additional hedging or trees to shield the site would block our views from our garden. Our house has all its windows on that side, so the extraction site would ruin 100% of our time at home. Dust would blow in all our windows and trickle vents even if we only had them slightly ajar.
SUMMARY
Dust pollution- negative health impact
Noise pollution- loss of amenity space
Vibration pollution- loss of amenity space
Visual intrusion - loss of amenity space
Unsatisfactory traffic / infrastructure links- danger to life and loss of recreational spaces and public rights of way
Reduction in air quality- increase in pollutants and dangerous mineral dusts in the air
Site visual not only to those houses in view, but also to all passers by, as the proposed site on top of a hill.
The whole site is unsustainable and intrusive on all counts and should not proceed
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98026
Received: 28/10/2019
Respondent: Peter Loudoun
Below are my objections to the proposed Mineral site MIN116 (Breckland). I uphold the current view that the site is unsuitable but the reasons given in the plan are incomplete and must be updated to include the objections from myself and others in this stage of the review.
1. Reference Information
1.1. Health Hazards
Industry Standard dictates: "Smaller dust particles remain airborne for longer, dispersing widely and depositing more slowly over a wider area. Large dust particles (greater than 30 μ m), which make up the greatest proportion of dust emitted from mineral workings, will largely deposit within 100m of sources. Intermediate-sized particles (10-30 μ m) are likely to travel up to200-500m. Smaller particles (less than 10 μ m) which make up a small proportion of the dust emitted from most mineral workings, are only deposited slowly but may travel 1000m or more".
1.2. Department of Environment Guidance on Planning for Quarries (including Gravel and Sand extraction)
3.3 Dust deposition/air quality
As in the case of noise, there are numerous sources of dust generation within quarries, including the stripping of topsoil, the excavation of sand and gravel, the crushing and screening of aggregates, ancillary activities such as concrete mixing, and the transport of sand, gravel and finished products (point emissions). Wind can carry dust particles well beyond the site boundaries, and fine materials from lorries can be deposited along public roads (fugitive emissions).
Residents living in proximity to quarries can potentially be affected by dust up to 0.5km from the source, although continual or severe concerns about dust are most likely to be experienced within about 100m of the dust source. The main potential impacts of dust are visual impacts, coating/soiling of property (including housing, washing, and cars), coating of vegetation, contamination of soils, water pollution, change in plant species composition, loss of sensitive plant species, increased inputs of mineral nutrients and altered pH balances. Respirable particles, i.e. those less than 10 micrometers in diameter, have the potential to cause effects on human health, depending on exposure levels.
3.4 Water supplies and groundwater
The quantity, and physical and chemical quality, of surface waters and groundwaters may be affected by quarrying activities; flows can be increased or decreased and may be contaminated by runoff or dust from the quarry. The removal of topsoil, overburden and aggregates may affect the quality of water recharging of an aquifer, and excavation below the water table may lead to de-watering of adjacent watercourses and wells.
2. Objections Relating to the approval of Site MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth
2.1. Location Devastation
This is not a brownfield site, or wasteland, its not grassland or scrubland. This is Greenfield and Prime Agricultural land, of high grade, that is farmed annually. The landscape will be permanently and irreplaceably scarred. Locals for many miles will have to put up with the noise, dust, and increased HGVs. The site is next to a Public Right of Way and a Bridleway which are the only public access in an area of natural beauty and wildlife. Consideration should also be given to the diminishing areas of unspoilt natural beauty and wildlife as this is one of the few such areas still remaining.
2.1.1. The site is bounded by restricted byway and bridleway which represents only local off-road access to the countryside.
2.1.2. The area is rich in wildlife and plants which includes Red Kites, Buzzards, Skylarks, Deer, Hares, Bats and Hobbys. These will be adversely affected by the dust and noise from the proposed site.
2.1.3. This is at one of the higher points in the areas with beautiful far reaching views. These views will be ruined by the proposed site.
2.1.4. The area surrounding the proposed site is a popular local amenity and used by walkers, horse riders, cyclists, runners and dog walkers. People come from many of the surrounding villages and the town of Hingham. The noise, dust and traffic would be detrimental to these activities.
2.1.5. Mineral extraction at this site would have unacceptable local landscape impacts and screening and bunding could be intrusive in its own right. Whilst it may be possible to mitigate adverse landscape impacts through advance planting and bunding, this is uncertain and there are more acceptable alternative sites for sand and gravel extraction proposed in the Plan.
2.1.6. Due to the higher elevation of the proposed site, waste water from the extraction process may pollute the lower water sources which will affect homes, wildlife, plants and trees.
2.1.7. Widening the lanes would not be possible without removing many mature oak trees and hedging that line the routes. Trees lining Woodrising Road are often damaged by passing machinery/large vehicles. Removal of hedging is detrimental to wildlife habitat.
2.2. Health Hazards
The Reference Information identifies the following risks. These include a number of risks to life.
2.2.1. Risk to the quality of adjacent water sources. This would not only affect wildlife and plants/vegetation but will also affect the many properties in the area that rely on Bore Holes as their only source of water due to the lack of piped water.
2.2.2. The main potential impacts of dust are visual impacts, coating/soiling of property (including housing, washing, and cars), coating of vegetation, contamination of soils, water pollution, change in plant species composition, loss of sensitive plant species, increased inputs of mineral nutrients and altered pH balances. Respirable particles, i.e. those less than 10 micro meters in diameter, have the potential to cause effects on human health, depending on exposure levels.
2.2.3. The effect of Respirable particles on residents taking Immune Suppressant drugs is unknown but like to have a greater impact. [Redacted text - personal data].
2.2.4. The risk to the health of animal, birds, bats and water wildlife will increase due to dust, noise pollution and increased traffic.
2.2.5. The run off of water used in the extraction process may pollute the local water, used in the bore holes, of the properties within 500 metres of the site. This may be detrimental to the health of the residents.
2.3. Highways
The proposal for site MIN116 indicates that the site would use the C159 Wood Rising Road east to the B1108 Watton Road. It is my experience that HGVs and other large vehicles utilise the shortest route to their destination, usually influenced by Satnav. This would result in the Quarry traffic taking routes that would take heavy vehicles through Cranworth, Shipdham (coming out at the junction with A1075 opposite the church or going past the school, Scoulton, Southburgh (including Pye Lane, River Lane) and the unnamed lane past Hurdlemakers Cottage.
2.3.1. Woodrising Road from the proposed site is unsuitable for HGVs. The Woodrising Road to Frost Row is substandard and would deteriorate quickly with the additional traffic, especially at passing places, many of which are not official passing places and not maintained.
2.3.2. The increased heavy traffic and other traffic will increase the risk of injury and death to pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, runners and joggers as there are no footpaths.
2.3.3. The exit from Woodrising Road to B1108 at Frost Row is dangerous with restricted views of oncoming traffic restricted by a bend on B1108 and the angle of the road exit. The B1108 has a maximum speed limit of 60mph at the junction with Woodrising Road.
2.3.4. There is no way of restricting HGVs visiting the site from using the rural roads through villages such as Southburgh, Woodrising and Cranworth. HGVs are likely to go through Shipdham, using the exits to A1075 at the Church or going past the school.
2.3.5. Increased traffic, not only the HGVs distributing the Sand and Gravel but also extra vehicles for the daily workforce, site service vehicles and non-site vehicles collecting sand and gravel.
2.3.6. Increased Heavy Goods traffic through Hingham and its surrounding roads will have an adverse effect on the structure (roads and buildings) and safety within the town.
2.3.7. Many of the local properties are old and made from Clay Lump and have flint or brick footings rather than foundations. Vibration from heavy traffic and mining machinery may have an adverse effect on these properties.
2.3.8. Once the extraction of minerals is complete there will be additional heavy traffic infilling the site in order to return it to agricultural use. This will also have a significant impact.
2.3.9. The local roads are regularly used as crossing points for individual and herds of deer. Increased traffic will increase the probability of accidents resulting in the death or injury to deer and the resulting damage to vehicles.
2.4. Local Impact
2.4.1. The plan gives recognition to properties within 250 metres of the proposed site and recognises two properties; Hurdlemakers Cottage and Grove Farm. Grove Farm is incorrectly defined as it now is made up of two properties - Grove Farmhouse and Grove Farm Barn. The plan needs to be corrected.
2.4.2. The Norfolk County Council Infrastructure and Development Select Committee, when considering the plan, stated that "Members were concerned that the consultation distance of 250 metres was not far reaching enough especially when some of the proposed sites are in locations which had not experienced anything similar before. The sites had the potential to affect whole communities, some of which are further away than 250 metres from the proposed site". The concern of members has not been reflected in the plan.
2.4.3. Many more properties are within 500 to 750 metres of the proposed site, including a school. Kingsbrook School is a specialist residential mixed gender therapeutic school for students aged 11 to 18 years with complex needs. These include mental health and associated difficulties, for example, behavioural, emotional and social difficulties. Some of their young people will also have developed specific needs due to a range of factors including trauma, post-traumatic stress disorder or attachment disorder. The noise, dust and increased heavy traffic would have a detrimental effect on vulnerable young people.
2.4.4. Ditch water from the Grove Farm properties and the field behind them drains into the land adjacent to the proposed site. The effects of the proposed site on drainage would need to be reviewed.
2.4.5. The mineral extraction process will use a large amount of water which is likely to be extracted by borehole. This is likely to be detrimental to the many properties in the area rely on bore holes as their only supply of water. This may make water unavailable to some homes.
Please find attached my objections to the inclusion of site MIN116 Woodrinsing Road, Cranworth in the Preferred Options of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan. I uphold the view that the site is unsuitable but the reasons given in the plan are incomplete and must be updated to include the objections from myself and others in this stage of the review.
Please also note that on your website, under the chapter What Happens Next para e) Examination Hearings (January 2020), I believe the entry should read "January 2021) as per the following paragraph f).
Minerals and Waste Local Plan Review: Preferred Options
Below are my objections to the proposed Mineral site MIN116 (Breckland). I uphold the current view that the site is unsuitable but the reasons given in the plan are incomplete and must be updated to include the objections from myself and others in this stage of the review.
1. Reference Information
1.1. Health Hazards
Industry Standard dictates: "Smaller dust particles remain airborne for longer, dispersing widely and depositing more slowly over a wider area. Large dust particles (greater than 30 μ m), which make up the greatest proportion of dust emitted from mineral workings, will largely deposit within 100m of sources. Intermediate-sized particles (10-30 μ m) are likely to travel up to200-500m. Smaller particles (less than 10 μ m) which make up a small proportion of the dust emitted from most mineral workings, are only deposited slowly but may travel 1000m or more".
1.2. Department of Environment Guidance on Planning for Quarries (including Gravel and Sand extraction)
3.3 Dust deposition/air quality
As in the case of noise, there are numerous sources of dust generation within quarries, including the stripping of topsoil, the excavation of sand and gravel, the crushing and screening of aggregates, ancillary activities such as concrete mixing, and the transport of sand, gravel and finished products (point emissions). Wind can carry dust particles well beyond the site boundaries, and fine materials from lorries can be deposited along public roads (fugitive emissions).
Residents living in proximity to quarries can potentially be affected by dust up to 0.5km from the source, although continual or severe concerns about dust are most likely to be experienced within about 100m of the dust source. The main potential impacts of dust are visual impacts, coating/soiling of property (including housing, washing, and cars), coating of vegetation, contamination of soils, water pollution, change in plant species composition, loss of sensitive plant species, increased inputs of mineral nutrients and altered pH balances. Respirable particles, i.e. those less than 10 micrometers in diameter, have the potential to cause effects on human health, depending on exposure levels.
3.4 Water supplies and groundwater
The quantity, and physical and chemical quality, of surface waters and groundwaters may be affected by quarrying activities; flows can be increased or decreased and may be contaminated by runoff or dust from the quarry. The removal of topsoil, overburden and aggregates may affect the quality of water recharging of an aquifer, and excavation below the water table may lead to de-watering of adjacent watercourses and wells.
2. Objections Relating to the approval of Site MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth
2.1. Location Devastation
This is not a brownfield site, or wasteland, its not grassland or scrubland. This is Greenfield and Prime Agricultural land, of high grade, that is farmed annually. The landscape will be permanently and irreplaceably scarred. Locals for many miles will have to put up with the noise, dust, and increased HGVs. The site is next to a Public Right of Way and a Bridleway which are the only public access in an area of natural beauty and wildlife. Consideration should also be given to the diminishing areas of unspoilt natural beauty and wildlife as this is one of the few such areas still remaining.
2.1.1. The site is bounded by restricted byway and bridleway which represents only local off-road access to the countryside.
2.1.2. The area is rich in wildlife and plants which includes Red Kites, Buzzards, Skylarks, Deer, Hares, Bats and Hobbys. These will be adversely affected by the dust and noise from the proposed site.
2.1.3. This is at one of the higher points in the areas with beautiful far reaching views. These views will be ruined by the proposed site.
2.1.4. The area surrounding the proposed site is a popular local amenity and used by walkers, horse riders, cyclists, runners and dog walkers. People come from many of the surrounding villages and the town of Hingham. The noise, dust and traffic would be detrimental to these activities.
2.1.5. Mineral extraction at this site would have unacceptable local landscape impacts and screening and bunding could be intrusive in its own right. Whilst it may be possible to mitigate adverse landscape impacts through advance planting and bunding, this is uncertain and there are more acceptable alternative sites for sand and gravel extraction proposed in the Plan.
2.1.6. Due to the higher elevation of the proposed site, waste water from the extraction process may pollute the lower water sources which will affect homes, wildlife, plants and trees.
2.1.7. Widening the lanes would not be possible without removing many mature oak trees and hedging that line the routes. Trees lining Woodrising Road are often damaged by passing machinery/large vehicles. Removal of hedging is detrimental to wildlife habitat.
2.2. Health Hazards
The Reference Information identifies the following risks. These include a number of risks to life.
2.2.1. Risk to the quality of adjacent water sources. This would not only affect wildlife and plants/vegetation but will also affect the many properties in the area that rely on Bore Holes as their only source of water due to the lack of piped water.
2.2.2. The main potential impacts of dust are visual impacts, coating/soiling of property (including housing, washing, and cars), coating of vegetation, contamination of soils, water pollution, change in plant species composition, loss of sensitive plant species, increased inputs of mineral nutrients and altered pH balances. Respirable particles, i.e. those less than 10 micro meters in diameter, have the potential to cause effects on human health, depending on exposure levels.
2.2.3. The effect of Respirable particles on residents taking Immune Suppressant drugs is unknown but like to have a greater impact. [redacted text personal data].
2.2.4. The risk to the health of animal, birds, bats and water wildlife will increase due to dust, noise pollution and increased traffic.
2.2.5. The run off of water used in the extraction process may pollute the local water, used in the bore holes, of the properties within 500 metres of the site. This may be detrimental to the health of the residents.
2.3. Highways
The proposal for site MIN116 indicates that the site would use the C159 Wood Rising Road east to the B1108 Watton Road. It is my experience that HGVs and other large vehicles utilise the shortest route to their destination, usually influenced by Satnav. This would result in the Quarry traffic taking routes that would take heavy vehicles through Cranworth, Shipdham (coming out at the junction with A1075 opposite the church or going past the school, Scoulton, Southburgh (including Pye Lane, River Lane) and the unnamed lane past Hurdlemakers Cottage.
2.3.1. Woodrising Road from the proposed site is unsuitable for HGVs. The Woodrising Road to Frost Row is substandard and would deteriorate quickly with the additional traffic, especially at passing places, many of which are not official passing places and not maintained.
2.3.2. The increased heavy traffic and other traffic will increase the risk of injury and death to pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, runners and joggers as there are no footpaths.
2.3.3. The exit from Woodrising Road to B1108 at Frost Row is dangerous with restricted views of oncoming traffic restricted by a bend on B1108 and the angle of the road exit. The B1108 has a maximum speed limit of 60mph at the junction with Woodrising Road.
2.3.4. There is no way of restricting HGVs visiting the site from using the rural roads through villages such as Southburgh, Woodrising and Cranworth. HGVs are likely to go through Shipdham, using the exits to A1075 at the Church or going past the school.
2.3.5. Increased traffic, not only the HGVs distributing the Sand and Gravel but also extra vehicles for the daily workforce, site service vehicles and non-site vehicles collecting sand and gravel.
2.3.6. Increased Heavy Goods traffic through Hingham and its surrounding roads will have an adverse effect on the structure (roads and buildings) and safety within the town.
2.3.7. Many of the local properties are old and made from Clay Lump and have flint or brick footings rather than foundations. Vibration from heavy traffic and mining machinery may have an adverse effect on these properties.
2.3.8. Once the extraction of minerals is complete there will be additional heavy traffic infilling the site in order to return it to agricultural use. This will also have a significant impact.
2.3.9. The local roads are regularly used as crossing points for individual and herds of deer. Increased traffic will increase the probability of accidents resulting in the death or injury to deer and the resulting damage to vehicles.
2.4. Local Impact
2.4.1. The plan gives recognition to properties within 250 metres of the proposed site and recognises two properties; Hurdlemakers Cottage and Grove Farm. Grove Farm is incorrectly defined as it now is made up of two properties - Grove Farmhouse and Grove Farm Barn. The plan needs to be corrected.
2.4.2. The Norfolk County Council Infrastructure and Development Select Committee, when considering the plan, stated that "Members were concerned that the consultation distance of 250 metres was not far reaching enough especially when some of the proposed sites are in locations which had not experienced anything similar before. The sites had the potential to affect whole communities, some of which are further away than 250 metres from the proposed site". The concern of members has not been reflected in the plan.
2.4.3. Many more properties are within 500 to 750 metres of the proposed site, including a school. Kingsbrook School is a specialist residential mixed gender therapeutic school for students aged 11 to 18 years with complex needs. These include mental health and associated difficulties, for example, behavioural, emotional and social difficulties. Some of their young people will also have developed specific needs due to a range of factors including trauma, post-traumatic stress disorder or attachment disorder. The noise, dust and increased heavy traffic would have a detrimental effect on vulnerable young people.
2.4.4. Ditch water from the Grove Farm properties and the field behind them drains into the land adjacent to the proposed site. The effects of the proposed site on drainage would need to be reviewed.
2.4.5. The mineral extraction process will use a large amount of water which is likely to be extracted by borehole. This is likely to be detrimental to the many properties in the area rely on bore holes as their only supply of water. This may make water unavailable to some homes.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98028
Received: 28/10/2019
Respondent: Mr Peter Bond
I am writing to lodge my strong objection to the proposed gravel and sand quarry at woodrising road (Site MIN116).
This area is one of the most unspoilt and beautiful areas in this locality and would be totally ruined by having a such a large excavation together with the attendant heavy vehicles, going to and from the site all day and every day. The narrow lanes in the area are unsuited for this type of heavy traffic, and are currently used by equestrians, dog walkers, hikers and cyclists.
The noise from heavy vehicle engines will be heard over a wide area, not to mention the extremely irritating sound all day long of industrial vehicle reverse beepers, which due to their high pitch can be heard plainly over great distances.
The fact that the only notice from the council of this, was a small notice put up at the site, and the short period in which to register an objection, would seem to indicate an attempt to push this proposal through by stealth. Most people in the area would not have been made aware, had it not been for the sharp eye of one local resident.
As a community we will be looking to the council to rethink this terrible plan.
I am writing to lodge my strong objection to the proposed gravel and sand quarry at woodrising road (Site MIN116).
This area is one of the most unspoilt and beautiful areas in this locality and would be totally ruined by having a such a large excavation together with the attendant heavy vehicles, going to and from the site all day and every day. The narrow lanes in the area are unsuited for this type of heavy traffic, and are currently used by equestrians, dog walkers, hikers and cyclists.
The noise from heavy vehicle engines will be heard over a wide area, not to mention the extremely irritating sound all day long of industrial vehicle reverse beepers, which due to their high pitch can be heard plainly over great distances.
The fact that the only notice from the council of this, was a small notice put up at the site, and the short period in which to register an objection, would seem to indicate an attempt to push this proposal through by stealth. Most people in the area would not have been made aware, had it not been for the sharp eye of one local resident.
As a community we will be looking to the council to rethink this terrible plan.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98030
Received: 28/10/2019
Respondent: Mrs Jacqueline Coverley
I write with reference to the above proposal at Woodrising Road, Hingham and would like to strongly object to the proposed sand and gravel excavation.
I have just moved to the area, a move generated by the quiet lanes and stunning countryside around Hingham. The quiet lanes are a huge attraction for not just dog walking and horse riding but for enjoying the varied wildlife that can be seen, deer, pheasants and other wild birds, and bats.
These animals are finding their habitats becoming smaller and smaller as the whole country is encouraged to develop our land for housing.
The lanes around the Woodrising road are narrow and only single track with few overtaking/ passing places, to allow large 20 tonne lorries onto these lanes would almost certainly lead to accidents.
Most of the dog walkers that I have observed using these lanes, are from Hingham itself and provide a quiet and peaceful environment to walk in. Only up the lane from us is a stud with youngstock needing to be turned out and race horses requiring exercise which involves using the Woodrising Road.
I appreciate a need for minerals and sand but this particular site is in the most attractive piece of countryside I have seen for a long time, and I would ask that you reconsider any excavation in this area, their may be possible light pollution in an area with no light pollution at all currently.
There would be constant noise, dust and air pollution and possible subsequent land fill.
There is also one of the few restricted byways adjacent to this proposed site for dog walkers and horse riders, no amount of screening would conceal the activities from either group and would destroy their enjoyment .
My understanding is also that once these sites have had their minerals/ sand extracted that they then become potential waste sites.
I write with reference to the above proposal at Woodrising Road, Hingham and would like to strongly object to the proposed sand and gravel excavation.
I have just moved to the area, a move generated by the quiet lanes and stunning countryside around Hingham. The quiet lanes are a huge attraction for not just dog walking and horse riding but for enjoying the varied wildlife that can be seen, deer, pheasants and other wild birds, and bats.
These animals are finding their habitats becoming smaller and smaller as the whole country is encouraged to develop our land for housing.
The lanes around the Woodrising road are narrow and only single track with few overtaking/ passing places, to allow large 20 tonne lorries onto these lanes would almost certainly lead to accidents.
Most of the dog walkers that I have observed using these lanes, are from Hingham itself and provide a quiet and peaceful environment to walk in. Only up the lane from us is a stud with youngstock needing to be turned out and race horses requiring exercise which involves using the Woodrising Road.
I appreciate a need for minerals and sand but this particular site is in the most attractive piece of countryside I have seen for a long time, and I would ask that you reconsider any excavation in this area, their may be possible light pollution in an area with no light pollution at all currently.
There would be constant noise, dust and air pollution and possible subsequent land fill.
There is also one of the few restricted byways adjacent to this proposed site for dog walkers and horse riders, no amount of screening would conceal the activities from either group and would destroy their enjoyment .
My understanding is also that once these sites have had their minerals/ sand extracted that they then become potential waste sites.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98032
Received: 28/10/2019
Respondent: Hingham Town council
MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth
Having regard to the information on the consultation page on the Norfolk County Council website, and regard to representations made to the Town Council by members of the public, the Town Council considered the proposal for gravel and sand extraction at Woodrising Road, Cranworth.
The Town Council consider that the land in Cranworth, put forward for allocation is not appropriate in location as per the concerns outlined on the consultation page, (by which NCC have concluded that the site is unsuitable), and the representations raised by local residents.
Hingham Town Council therefore object to this land being included as a site for allocation for gravel and sand/mineral extraction, in the Minerals and Waste Local Plan.
details of representation as below:
* Woodrising Road from the proposed site is unsuitable for HGVs. The Woodrising Road to Frost Row is substandard and would deteriorate quickly with the additional traffic, especially at passing places, many of which are not official passing places and not maintained
* The exit from Woodrising Road to B1108 at Frost Row is dangerous with restricted views of oncoming traffic restricted by a bend on B1108 and the angle of the road exit. The B1108 has a maximum speed limit of 60mph at the junction with Woodrising Road.
* There is no way of restricting HGVs visiting the site from using the rural roads through villages such as Southburgh, Woodrising and Cranworth. HGVs are likely to go through Shipdham, using the exits to A1075 at the Church or going past the school.
* Increased traffic, not only the HGVs distributing the Sand and Gravel but also extra vehicles for the daily workforce, site service vehicles and non-site vehicles collecting sand and gravel.
* Increased Heavy Goods traffic through Hingham and its surrounding roads.
* Many of the local properties are old and made from Clay Lump and have flint or brick footings rather than foundations. Vibration from heavy traffic and mining machinery may have an adverse effect on these properties
* Once the extraction of minerals is complete there will be additional heavy traffic infilling the site in order to return it to agricultural use. This will also have a significant impact.
* The site is bounded by restricted byway and bridleway which represents only local offroad access to the countryside.
* The area is rich in wildlife and plants which includes Red Kites, Buzzards, Skylarks, Deer, Hares, Bats and Hobbys. This will be adversely affected by the dust and noise from the proposed site.
* This is at one of the higher points in the areas with beautiful far reaching views. These views will be ruined by the proposed site.
* The area surrounding the proposed site is a popular local amenity and used by walkers, horse riders, cyclists, runners and dog walkers. People come from many of the surrounding villages and the town of Hingham. The noise, dust and traffic would be detrimental to these activities.
* Mineral extraction at this site would have unacceptable local landscape impacts and screening and bunding could be intrusive in its own right. Whilst it may be possible to mitigate adverse landscape impacts through advance planting and bunding, this is uncertain and there are more acceptable alternative sites for sand and gravel extraction proposed in the Plan.
* The mineral extraction process will use a large amount of water which is likely to be extracted by borehole. This is likely to be detrimental to the many properties in the area rely on bore holes as their only supply of water. This may make water unavailable to some homes.
* Due to the higher elevation of the proposed site, waste water from the extraction process may pollute the lower water sources which will affect homes, wildlife, plants and trees.
MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth
Having regard to the information on the consultation page on the Norfolk County Council website, and regard to representations made to the Town Council by members of the public, the Town Council considered the proposal for gravel and sand extraction at Woodrising Road, Cranworth.
The Town Council consider that the land in Cranworth, put forward for allocation is not appropriate in location as per the concerns outlined on the consultation page, (by which NCC have concluded that the site is unsuitable), and the representations raised by local residents.
Hingham Town Council therefore object to this land being included as a site for allocation for gravel and sand/mineral extraction, in the Minerals and Waste Local Plan.
details of representation as below:
* Woodrising Road from the proposed site is unsuitable for HGVs. The Woodrising Road to Frost Row is substandard and would deteriorate quickly with the additional traffic, especially at passing places, many of which are not official passing places and not maintained
* The exit from Woodrising Road to B1108 at Frost Row is dangerous with restricted views of oncoming traffic restricted by a bend on B1108 and the angle of the road exit. The B1108 has a maximum speed limit of 60mph at the junction with Woodrising Road.
* There is no way of restricting HGVs visiting the site from using the rural roads through villages such as Southburgh, Woodrising and Cranworth. HGVs are likely to go through Shipdham, using the exits to A1075 at the Church or going past the school.
* Increased traffic, not only the HGVs distributing the Sand and Gravel but also extra vehicles for the daily workforce, site service vehicles and non-site vehicles collecting sand and gravel.
* Increased Heavy Goods traffic through Hingham and its surrounding roads.
* Many of the local properties are old and made from Clay Lump and have flint or brick footings rather than foundations. Vibration from heavy traffic and mining machinery may have an adverse effect on these properties
* Once the extraction of minerals is complete there will be additional heavy traffic infilling the site in order to return it to agricultural use. This will also have a significant impact.
* The site is bounded by restricted byway and bridleway which represents only local offroad access to the countryside.
* The area is rich in wildlife and plants which includes Red Kites, Buzzards, Skylarks, Deer, Hares, Bats and Hobbys. This will be adversely affected by the dust and noise from the proposed site.
* This is at one of the higher points in the areas with beautiful far reaching views. These views will be ruined by the proposed site.
* The area surrounding the proposed site is a popular local amenity and used by walkers, horse riders, cyclists, runners and dog walkers. People come from many of the surrounding villages and the town of Hingham. The noise, dust and traffic would be detrimental to these activities.
* Mineral extraction at this site would have unacceptable local landscape impacts and screening and bunding could be intrusive in its own right. Whilst it may be possible to mitigate adverse landscape impacts through advance planting and bunding, this is uncertain and there are more acceptable alternative sites for sand and gravel extraction proposed in the Plan.
* The mineral extraction process will use a large amount of water which is likely to be extracted by borehole. This is likely to be detrimental to the many properties in the area rely on bore holes as their only supply of water. This may make water unavailable to some homes.
* Due to the higher elevation of the proposed site, waste water from the extraction process may pollute the lower water sources which will affect homes, wildlife, plants and trees.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98034
Received: 25/10/2019
Respondent: Mr & Mrs M & C Dalton
Number of people: 2
Regarding MIN116 Proposed Site MIN 116 'land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth - Objection
Our home is on the eastern boundary of the proposed site. The prevailing wind is from the west and we would suffer greatly from dust being blown around and in the house. During site working hours it is likely we would not be able to be outside in the garden or be able to have windows open.
Noise would also be an issue as this is a very quiet area. The prevailing wind is from the west and often strong. Trees and a bund will not stop dust affecting our house inside and out. For the same reason the existing very low background noise levels and extremely low traffic density means the new noise would be significant and intrusive. This part of Norfolk has no artificial lighting so, at night, the sky is black. The artificial lighting necessary to operate or secure the site would destroy that.
If the site is given permission our property and those of our neighbours would suffer significant reductions in value and so we would seek to recoup those reductions from the Council.
Regarding MIN116 Proposed Site MIN 116 'land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth - Objection
Our home is on the eastern boundary of the proposed site. The prevailing wind is from the west and we would suffer greatly from dust being blown around and in the house. During site working hours it is likely we would not be able to be outside in the garden or be able to have windows open.
Noise would also be an issue as this is a very quiet area. The prevailing wind is from the west and often strong. Trees and a bund will not stop dust affecting our house inside and out. For the same reason the existing very low background noise levels and extremely low traffic density means the new noise would be significant and intrusive. This part of Norfolk has no artificial lighting so, at night, the sky is black. The artificial lighting necessary to operate or secure the site would destroy that.
If the site is given permission our property and those of our neighbours would suffer significant reductions in value and so we would seek to recoup those reductions from the Council.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98036
Received: 25/10/2019
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Liz & Alan Briton
My husband and I are writing to you to object to the proposed gravel and sand quarry at Woodrising. It is totally inappropriate for this area and our countryside. As it borders the byway and our narrow roads it will have a detriment effect on all of those who use them i.e. walkers, runners, cyclists, horse riders and those of us who walk our dogs there. Plus it will have a detrimental effect on our wildlife, fauna and flora and possibly the crops.
You estimate 18 lorries a day (and the rest)!! Plus you cannot guarantee which roads they will use. We live in Southburgh on the corner of Church Lane and High Common. When we moved here we expected to have the farm traffic as it is a farming community. What we did not expect were the huge 14+ wheeled articulated lorries coming and going to Shipham airfield on a daily basis. If you cannot control/prevent these from using the narrow lanes what makes you think you can control the lorries from the proposed gravel and sand pit?? All the surrounding villages are not equipped for this heavy traffic.
Then there is the matter of the noise. I cannot believe that you think putting up a few trees will block this out. Noise could be heard here in Southburgh earlier this year when 'samples' were being taken and you expect us to believe we won't hear any noise if the gravel pit was to be given the go ahead (dream on!). This is totally unacceptable to those of us who live in the surrounding areas and as a community we wholeheartedly object!!!
My husband and I are writing to you to object to the proposed gravel and sand quarry at Woodrising. It is totally inappropriate for this area and our countryside. As it borders the byway and our narrow roads it will have a detriment effect on all of those who use them i.e. walkers, runners, cyclists, horse riders and those of us who walk our dogs there. Plus it will have a detrimental effect on our wildlife, fauna and flora and possibly the crops.
You estimate 18 lorries a day (and the rest)!! Plus you cannot guarantee which roads they will use. We live in Southburgh on the corner of Church Lane and High Common. When we moved here we expected to have the farm traffic as it is a farming community. What we did not expect were the huge 14+ wheeled articulated lorries coming and going to Shipham airfield on a daily basis. If you cannot control/prevent these from using the narrow lanes what makes you think you can control the lorries from the proposed gravel and sand pit?? All the surrounding villages are not equipped for this heavy traffic.
Then there is the matter of the noise. I cannot believe that you think putting up a few trees will block this out. Noise could be heard here in Southburgh earlier this year when 'samples' were being taken and you expect us to believe we won't hear any noise if the gravel pit was to be given the go ahead (dream on!). This is totally unacceptable to those of us who live in the surrounding areas and as a community we wholeheartedly object!!!
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98038
Received: 24/10/2019
Respondent: Shipdham parish council
Shipdham Parish Council expressed concerns about proximity of adjacent footpath and impact on traffic on local and surrounding roads.
Shipdham Parish Council expressed concerns about proximity of adjacent footpath and impact on traffic on local and surrounding roads.
Object
Preferred Options consultation document
Representation ID: 98040
Received: 21/10/2019
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Ian & Joanne Betts
MIN116: Letter of Objection
Dear Sir or Madam,
I write to record our objection to the proposed sand and Gravel excavation at Woodrising Road, Woodrising.
Having previously lived within a five mile radius of such a facility I can say that the roads nearby were both busy and dirty due to the quarrying of this type of material. Woodrising is a beautiful part of the county and this development would certainly spoil that.
The roads surrounding Woodrising are small and certainly not designed for lorries of any sort. Other villages would certainly become cut through routes and are unsuitable for such use.
The river Blackwater, the source of the River Yare, which is very close to this site is likely to become polluted to the detriment of wildlife in the area. What environmental impact assessment has or will be done to quantify the level of damage this development will certainly cause.
It is noted that an estimated 18 lorries per day will use the facility. If that were the case it would take 152 years working 7 days a week to carry 1 million tonnes of quarried materials per day away. The estimated figure is less than transparent and no reasoning is given as to how it was arrived at. Will this be a maximum permissible figure?
The manner in which local villagers have been 'consulted' is also less than satisfactory, one small sign at the entrance to the site could be argued to be the minimum permitted and an attempt to prevent proper discussion of the subject.
In short this development is unsuitable as it will blight the locality with noise, dust and dirt, particularly that which washes out of the sand as it is transported and deposited on roads which are insufficient for the purpose of carrying this type of extra traffic.
We invite you remove this site from the Norfolk county Council plan.
MIN116: Letter of Objection
Dear Sir or Madam,
I write to record our objection to the proposed sand and Gravel excavation at Woodrising Road, Woodrising.
Having previously lived within a five mile radius of such a facility I can say that the roads nearby were both busy and dirty due to the quarrying of this type of material. Woodrising is a beautiful part of the county and this development would certainly spoil that.
The roads surrounding Woodrising are small and certainly not designed for lorries of any sort. Other villages would certainly become cut through routes and are unsuitable for such use.
The river Blackwater, the source of the River Yare, which is very close to this site is likely to become polluted to the detriment of wildlife in the area. What environmental impact assessment has or will be done to quantify the level of damage this development will certainly cause.
It is noted that an estimated 18 lorries per day will use the facility. If that were the case it would take 152 years working 7 days a week to carry 1 million tonnes of quarried materials per day away. The estimated figure is less than transparent and no reasoning is given as to how it was arrived at. Will this be a maximum permissible figure?
The manner in which local villagers have been 'consulted' is also less than satisfactory, one small sign at the entrance to the site could be argued to be the minimum permitted and an attempt to prevent proper discussion of the subject.
In short this development is unsuitable as it will blight the locality with noise, dust and dirt, particularly that which washes out of the sand as it is transported and deposited on roads which are insufficient for the purpose of carrying this type of extra traffic.
We invite you remove this site from the Norfolk county Council plan.