MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth

Showing comments and forms 31 to 39 of 39

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98042

Received: 20/09/2019

Respondent: Cllr Edward Connolly

Representation Summary:

As the County Councillor for Yare and All Saints Division I am writing to object to the proposed MIN 116 Woodrising, Cranworth site which is being proposed in the Norfolk Minerals and Waste Local Plan and ask for it to be rejected as unsuitable.

I understand NCC Highways have expressed concerns over the access routes to the proposed site. I am also concerned about the landscape and visual impact that will adversely effect the local area and residents living close to the site.

I am fully in support of Cranworth Parish Council's view and I understand they will also be writing to ask for this site to be removed from the plan.

Full text:

As the County Councillor for Yare and All Saints Division I am writing to object to the proposed MIN 116 Woodrising, Cranworth site which is being proposed in the Norfolk Minerals and Waste Local Plan and ask for it to be rejected as unsuitable.

I understand NCC Highways have expressed concerns over the access routes to the proposed site. I am also concerned about the landscape and visual impact that will adversely effect the local area and residents living close to the site.

I am fully in support of Cranworth Parish Council's view and I understand they will also be writing to ask for this site to be removed from the plan.

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98044

Received: 18/10/2019

Respondent: Lesley Moores

Representation Summary:

I would like to make a comment with regard to the Mineral and Waste plan for the Woodrising site MIN116. This is not a suitable site due to the narrow nature of the local roads, the abundance of unusual wildlife that exists on the area. The proposed site also lays along a Bridle path which is the only one for Southburgh and is used regularly by horse riders and dog walkers alike. To have this monstrosity there would spoil the enjoyment for local residents and those who travel from surrounding villages to enjoy a quiet, and beautifully peaceful place. Although the plans say that there will be access via other roads, this will push local traffic through single lane narrow roads that have very limited visabilty and are prone to flooding. This proposal is totally unsuitable for the suggested site.

Full text:

I would like to make a comment with regard to the Mineral and Waste plan for the Woodrising site MIN116. This is not a suitable site due to the narrow nature of the local roads, the abundance of unusual wildlife that exists on the area. The proposed site also lays along a Bridle path which is the only one for Southburgh and is used regularly by horse riders and dog walkers alike. To have this monstrosity there would spoil the enjoyment for local residents and those who travel from surrounding villages to enjoy a quiet, and beautifully peaceful place. Although the plans say that there will be access via other roads, this will push local traffic through single lane narrow roads that have very limited visabilty and are prone to flooding. This proposal is totally unsuitable for the suggested site.

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98046

Received: 14/10/2019

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Peter & Helen Scott

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

We are writing to formally object to the plan to include the above site in a future Minerals and Waste Development Plan.

There are many reasons why the inclusion of this site should be objected to, especially by those who live in this area, amongst which are the following.

This is an area with a wide range of wildlife; both kites and buzzards have established themselves strongly in recent years and along with the deer, hare, pheasant and other game birds, provide a very well balanced system. This would undoubtedly be affected by the proposed site being operated for a prolonged period of time. There are also many bats and smaller creatures that would be affected.

In our opinion it is unconscionable to destroy such a large piece of agricultural land for industrial use given the importance of that agriculture to the economy, both of the County and the Country, and even more so given the increasing population. We understand that there is a need for building materials but would strongly argue that to destroy agricultural land, in order to satisfy that need, would be a retrograde step.

Although Southburgh is not heavily populated there are several homes within a short distance of this site. They would undoubtedly be adversely affected in many ways should this plan be effected; noise, pollution and most importantly the risk to the water supply of many of those properties.

It is clear that quarries can use large quantities of water for processing and dust suppression and the process may cause major degradation of water resources either by drawdown of groundwater levels leading to the drying up of wells, diversion or damming of surface watercourses, and contamination of waters by uncontrolled site discharges. Possible lowering of the water table may affect supplies of water to local properties who are on boreholes, which are many, and the local rivers and ponds. This is not to mention the possibility of contamination of the local water supply through the disturbance of heavy metals and nutrient pollutants. What guarantees will be given about the protection of this vital resource, if that is at all possible?

Since moving here almost 10 years ago we have on several occasions seen the local farmers struggle to keep their crops watered. Climate change has led to unreliable rainfall and they often have to rely on pumping water from boreholes to keep crops alive. This proposal will jeopardise that option and could well affect the viability of agricultural land far greater than the actual site in question.

The area immediately surrounding the proposed site is an important amenity to those local to it. It is surrounded by lanes, bridleways and a byway that are very regularly used by walkers and for other exercises. This proposal would clearly damage that amenity by creating significant risk to walkers on the lanes, and by noise and other pollution of the immediate area.

Last but by no means least, is the issue of traffic. Large agricultural vehicles already use the lanes around this site and are a clear hazard to residents, which is accepted given the nature of the location. The lanes are often dangerously dirty and slippery because of this and as most of the lanes are single track, passing is often very tricky. This is, of course, accepted. We are in an agricultural area and the farming is vital not only to those involved but also to the local and national economies.

To deliberately increase these hazards and risks by increasing the passage of heavy vehicles considerably would seem to be quite reckless. We understand that the proposal estimates 18 truckloads of gravel per day will be removed from the site. It appears that a typical loaded truck will be in the region of 20 to 30 Tonnes, if not greater. There is only one road to and from that site remotely capable of carrying such traffic (Woodrising Road) and even it has parts where it would not be possible for two vehicles to pass, were one a truck weighing 30T.

The other lanes to and from the site are almost all single track and the risk created by having large trucks using them regularly is clear. Further, none of the lanes around the site are in what might be termed a good condition. Most have large numbers of potholes and edge damage. Allowing the proposed increase in heavy traffic would inevitably increase the damages could make some of the lanes impassable to normal traffic.

Extending the consideration of the increased traffic to a larger area, villages such as Hingham, Cranworth and Shipdham would suffer serious risk and damage by this large number of heavy vehicles passing through regularly.

We trust this matter will be given due and proper consideration before allowing what we consider to be a very negative and ill conceived proposal.

Full text:

We are writing to formally object to the plan to include the above site in a future Minerals and Waste Development Plan.

There are many reasons why the inclusion of this site should be objected to, especially by those who live in this area, amongst which are the following.

This is an area with a wide range of wildlife; both kites and buzzards have established themselves strongly in recent years and along with the deer, hare, pheasant and other game birds, provide a very well balanced system. This would undoubtedly be affected by the proposed site being operated for a prolonged period of time. There are also many bats and smaller creatures that would be affected.

In our opinion it is unconscionable to destroy such a large piece of agricultural land for industrial use given the importance of that agriculture to the economy, both of the County and the Country, and even more so given the increasing population. We understand that there is a need for building materials but would strongly argue that to destroy agricultural land, in order to satisfy that need, would be a retrograde step.

Although Southburgh is not heavily populated there are several homes within a short distance of this site. They would undoubtedly be adversely affected in many ways should this plan be effected; noise, pollution and most importantly the risk to the water supply of many of those properties.

It is clear that quarries can use large quantities of water for processing and dust suppression and the process may cause major degradation of water resources either by drawdown of groundwater levels leading to the drying up of wells, diversion or damming of surface watercourses, and contamination of waters by uncontrolled site discharges. Possible lowering of the water table may affect supplies of water to local properties who are on boreholes, which are many, and the local rivers and ponds. This is not to mention the possibility of contamination of the local water supply through the disturbance of heavy metals and nutrient pollutants. What guarantees will be given about the protection of this vital resource, if that is at all possible?

Since moving here almost 10 years ago we have on several occasions seen the local farmers struggle to keep their crops watered. Climate change has led to unreliable rainfall and they often have to rely on pumping water from boreholes to keep crops alive. This proposal will jeopardise that option and could well affect the viability of agricultural land far greater than the actual site in question.

The area immediately surrounding the proposed site is an important amenity to those local to it. It is surrounded by lanes, bridleways and a byway that are very regularly used by walkers and for other exercises. This proposal would clearly damage that amenity by creating significant risk to walkers on the lanes, and by noise and other pollution of the immediate area.

Last but by no means least, is the issue of traffic. Large agricultural vehicles already use the lanes around this site and are a clear hazard to residents, which is accepted given the nature of the location. The lanes are often dangerously dirty and slippery because of this and as most of the lanes are single track, passing is often very tricky. This is, of course, accepted. We are in an agricultural area and the farming is vital not only to those involved but also to the local and national economies.

To deliberately increase these hazards and risks by increasing the passage of heavy vehicles considerably would seem to be quite reckless. We understand that the proposal estimates 18 truckloads of gravel per day will be removed from the site. It appears that a typical loaded truck will be in the region of 20 to 30 Tonnes, if not greater. There is only one road to and from that site remotely capable of carrying such traffic (Woodrising Road) and even it has parts where it would not be possible for two vehicles to pass, were one a truck weighing 30T.

The other lanes to and from the site are almost all single track and the risk created by having large trucks using them regularly is clear. Further, none of the lanes around the site are in what might be termed a good condition. Most have large numbers of potholes and edge damage. Allowing the proposed increase in heavy traffic would inevitably increase the damages could make some of the lanes impassable to normal traffic.

Extending the consideration of the increased traffic to a larger area, villages such as Hingham, Cranworth and Shipdham would suffer serious risk and damage by this large number of heavy vehicles passing through regularly.

We trust this matter will be given due and proper consideration before allowing what we consider to be a very negative and ill conceived proposal.

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98049

Received: 14/10/2019

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Ian & Linda Smith

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

Dear Sir I wish to lodge an objection to the proposed sand and gravel quarry in Woodrising

The proposed site is unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles There would be an unacceptable increase in the level of traffic both hgv and vehicles for the workforce The Woodrising Road is unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles it is narrow in places,single track,and substandard.
Hgv's visiting the site could not be restricted from using local village roads The area is rich in wildlife which would adversely affected.
The mineral extraction process will use a large amount of water which could be detrimental to our property which relies upon water from a borehole The mineral extraction at this site will destroy a beautiful area and cause misery from both the noise and dust to local residents.
Please to our views into account

Full text:

Dear Sir I wish to lodge an objection to the proposed sand and gravel quarry in Woodrising

The proposed site is unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles There would be an unacceptable increase in the level of traffic both hgv and vehicles for the workforce The Woodrising Road is unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles it is narrow in places,single track,and substandard.
Hgv's visiting the site could not be restricted from using local village roads The area is rich in wildlife which would adversely affected.
The mineral extraction process will use a large amount of water which could be detrimental to our property which relies upon water from a borehole The mineral extraction at this site will destroy a beautiful area and cause misery from both the noise and dust to local residents.
Please to our views into account

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98051

Received: 10/10/2019

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Ferreira

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

As residents of Shipdham we would like to log our objection to the Gravel and Sand Pit proposal in Woodrising.
We believe that this would cause immeasurable disruption, environmental impact and congestion in the immediate and surrounding areas. The roads in Shipdham are already too small for the large vehicles currently using them and the area is known for its beauty, peace and wildlife which should not be ruined.

Full text:

As residents of Shipdham we would like to log our objection to the Gravel and Sand Pit proposal in Woodrising.
We believe that this would cause immeasurable disruption, environmental impact and congestion in the immediate and surrounding areas. The roads in Shipdham are already too small for the large vehicles currently using them and the area is known for its beauty, peace and wildlife which should not be ruined.

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98053

Received: 07/10/2019

Respondent: Mr & Mrs J Melton

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

I have not been able to leave the following comments and objections on the website. So I need to send you the following Representations AGAINST the proposals and any future proposals for Extracting Minerals in the Woodrising and Southburgh Parishes:

Please add these to the files and the online Representations regarding MIN116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth


RESIDENT'S VIEWS AND OBJECTION.
TO: Proposed Gravel Extraction:
AT: MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth.
On behalf of both communities of Woodrising and Southburgh, and the individual/isolated dwelling owners in the proximity of the devastating proposal above; I would like to express our relief at the conclusion that:
M116.22 The site is considered to be unsuitable for allocation.

The above conclusions not to proceed with this as a part of the Breckland Minerals Extraction Proposal, are definitive and should not allow for any appeal or future appeal to reconsider the site or indeed area of Woodrising and Southburgh for aggregate mineral extraction (or waste management). We would like to have included the following statements adding to those already concluded for NOT proceeding with the proposal:
M116.3,4,5,6,9,11,13,14: The area is clearly of the highest agricultural quality and of the highest rolling Norfolk landscape quality. It is the habitat for a number of declining UK species such as the Hare which retains a reasonable population, where as it is in serious decline in a number of neighbouring locations and other counties. The Red Kite (Bird of Prey) has in recent years established a growing number of nesting pairs and now can be regularly sighted. Both Barn Owls and Little Owls nest in the vicinity. With the later nesting in the Grade 1 Listed Woodrising Church, which has a designated conservation area of churchyard. One would challenge that this Grade 1 Listed Medieval Church is significantly closer to the proposed site than recorded in the proposal (certainly as-the-bird-flies). Many of the Church and Farm buildings provide for Bat populations. And a small but sustainable number of roe Deer live within the surrounding wooded habitats. These animals can be regularly seen roaming across the proposed site between the woodlands of Southburgh to the historically significant Woodrising Hall Estate woodland which close boarders the proposed site. This Wayland Plateau Farmland has a thriving Skylark population soaring and feeding above the proposed site and adjacent fields. Endangered species such as Hedgehogs, the Small Blue Butterfly, Weasels still maintain a habitat within the area. The recent report by Daniel Hayhow from the RSPB, lead author makes the clear case to save and maintain such habitats see Claire Marshall's BBC Science and Environment news report: "more than a quarter of UK mammals face extinction"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49892209


M116.2: The roads to and from the proposed site are, as has been determined, too narrow with single traffic ad-hoc passing places, and much of the route unable to accommodate haulage traffic. Verges and close hedgerows would be adversely damaged. The rights of local traffic roads users would be severely compromised. Significant finances would need to be spent on upgrading and maintaining the routes reducing the viability of the scheme. It is important to note that previous feasibility studies regarding mineral extraction within the area have been unapproved due to the poor level of Road Infrastructure.
M116.1,7,8,9: The owners of the Grade 2 Hurdlemaker's Cottage as will many other homeowners in the proximity and near vicinity, will find that their properties are unsalable. Home values within the area would be reduced generally. Homes within the area would experience significant increase in Noise and Dust Pollution. Hurdlemaker's Cottage would become uninhabitable and this Grade 2 Cottage would fall into dis-repair and dereliction.
M116.6: The farmland has experienced the enlarging of arable fields in recent decades and experienced the loss of significant hedgerows. The remaining Oaks Mark the line of previous hedgerow field boundaries and these have been close-ploughed and reduced prior to this feasibility application. This should not be allowed to continue unabated and the remaining Oaks should now be protected as Wayland Plateau Farmland and of Breckland Landscape Character.
M116.7: The Public Rights of Way bordering the proposed site of the historic Gypsy Lane and the Bridle Paths would be UNUSABLE.
M116.12,16: The area has a High Water Table as experienced by the local residents within winter months. I would therefore challenge the intention that extraction could be carried out 'Dry' and that the rare and uncommon plants at Scoulton Mere could indeed be threatened.

Full text:

I have not been able to leave the following comments and objections on the website. So I need to send you the following Representations AGAINST the proposals and any future proposals for Extracting Minerals in the Woodrising and Southburgh Parishes:

Please add these to the files and the online Representations regarding MIN116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth


RESIDENT'S VIEWS AND OBJECTION.
TO: Proposed Gravel Extraction:
AT: MIN 116 - land at Woodrising Road, Cranworth.
On behalf of both communities of Woodrising and Southburgh, and the individual/isolated dwelling owners in the proximity of the devastating proposal above; I would like to express our relief at the conclusion that:
M116.22 Conclusion: The site is considered to be unsuitable for allocation because:
* _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.
The above conclusions not to proceed with this as a part of the Breckland Minerals Extraction Proposal, are definitive and should not allow for any appeal or future appeal to reconsider the site or indeed area of Woodrising and Southburgh for aggregate mineral extraction (or waste management). We would like to have included the following statements adding to those already concluded for NOT proceeding with the proposal:
M116.3,4,5,6,9,11,13,14: The area is clearly of the highest agricultural quality and of the highest rolling Norfolk landscape quality. It is the habitat for a number of declining UK species such as the Hare which retains a reasonable population, where as it is in serious decline in a number of neighbouring locations and other counties. The Red Kite (Bird of Prey) has in recent years established a growing number of nesting pairs and now can be regularly sighted. Both Barn Owls and Little Owls nest in the vicinity. With the later nesting in the Grade 1 Listed Woodrising Church, which has a designated conservation area of churchyard. One would challenge that this Grade 1 Listed Medieval Church is significantly closer to the proposed site than recorded in the proposal (certainly as-the-bird-flies). Many of the Church and Farm buildings provide for Bat populations. And a small but sustainable number of roe Deer live within the surrounding wooded habitats. These animals can be regularly seen roaming across the proposed site between the woodlands of Southburgh to the historically significant Woodrising Hall Estate woodland which close boarders the proposed site. This Wayland Plateau Farmland has a thriving Skylark population soaring and feeding above the proposed site and adjacent fields. Endangered species such as Hedgehogs, the Small Blue Butterfly, Weasels still maintain a habitat within the area. The recent report by Daniel Hayhow from the RSPB, lead author makes the clear case to save and maintain such habitats see Claire Marshall's BBC Science and Environment news report: "more than a quarter of UK mammals face extinction"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49892209


M116.2: The roads to and from the proposed site are, as has been determined, too narrow with single traffic ad-hoc passing places, and much of the route unable to accommodate haulage traffic. Verges and close hedgerows would be adversely damaged. The rights of local traffic roads users would be severely compromised. Significant finances would need to be spent on upgrading and maintaining the routes reducing the viability of the scheme. It is important to note that previous feasibility studies regarding mineral extraction within the area have been unapproved due to the poor level of Road Infrastructure.
M116.1,7,8,9: The owners of the Grade 2 Hurdlemaker's Cottage as will many other homeowners in the proximity and near vicinity, will find that their properties are unsalable. Home values within the area would be reduced generally. Homes within the area would experience significant increase in Noise and Dust Pollution. Hurdlemaker's Cottage would become uninhabitable and this Grade 2 Cottage would fall into dis-repair and dereliction.
M116.6: The farmland has experienced the enlarging of arable fields in recent decades and experienced the loss of significant hedgerows. The remaining Oaks Mark the line of previous hedgerow field boundaries and these have been close-ploughed and reduced prior to this feasibility application. This should not be allowed to continue unabated and the remaining Oaks should now be protected as Wayland Plateau Farmland and of Breckland Landscape Character.
M116.7: The Public Rights of Way bordering the proposed site of the historic Gypsy Lane and the Bridle Paths would be UNUSABLE.
M116.12,16: The area has a High Water Table as experienced by the local residents within winter months. I would therefore challenge the intention that extraction could be carried out 'Dry' and that the rare and uncommon plants at Scoulton Mere could indeed be threatened.

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98133

Received: 29/10/2019

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Will & Hilary Campion

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

The initial proposal is to put this field on the minerals resources map for the purpose of gravel extraction.
We object to this because your department has a joint responsibility to provide for waste disposal as well as mineral extraction, and the one is almost certain to follow on from the other.
If planning permission were added to the application by the developers, several years of gravel extraction would be inevitably followed by many more years of landfill operations, to say nothing of a long-term rat infestation.
This would change the character of a large area - from mixed agriculture and forestry into something much more heavy - industrial.
From the higher end of the site there is at present a long, wide-open view over the fields to Southburgh. Along the North side of the proposed site there is an ancient public bridle path, much used by horse riders and walkers, including those walking their dogs. It has the best view of the traditional Norfolk landscape, and many people walk there to enjoy it, some from nearby houses, & others from further away.
We understand that the developers have offered to screen the site with trees. A recent hedge planted there by the previous owners, who, we understand, retain an interest in the development, does not promise well in this respect. It is only one metre from the tarmac of the Woodrising Road, and effectively precludes dog-walking on that side.
It is worth mentioning in this connection that the bridlepath sign was destroyed three times during the last five years, by heavy transport servicing the agricultural needs of this field. We had to repair the first two ourselves, and we can only imagine how much worse the situation would be after a change to industrial use.

Full text:

The initial proposal is to put this field on the minerals resources map for the purpose of gravel extraction.
We object to this because your department has a joint responsibility to provide for waste disposal as well as mineral extraction, and the one is almost certain to follow on from the other.
If planning permission were added to the application by the developers, several years of gravel extraction would be inevitably followed by many more years of landfill operations, to say nothing of a long-term rat infestation.
This would change the character of a large area - from mixed agriculture and forestry into something much more heavy - industrial.
From the higher end of the site there is at present a long, wide-open view over the fields to Southburgh. Along the North side of the proposed site there is an ancient public bridle path, much used by horse riders and walkers, including those walking their dogs. It has the best view of the traditional Norfolk landscape, and many people walk there to enjoy it, some from nearby houses, & others from further away.
We understand that the developers have offered to screen the site with trees. A recent hedge planted there by the previous owners, who, we understand, retain an interest in the development, does not promise well in this respect. It is only one metre from the tarmac of the Woodrising Road, and effectively precludes dog-walking on that side.
It is worth mentioning in this connection that the bridlepath sign was destroyed three times during the last five years, by heavy transport servicing the agricultural needs of this field. We had to repair the first two ourselves, and we can only imagine how much worse the situation would be after a change to industrial use.

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98229

Received: 08/10/2019

Respondent: Mrs S Bonta-White

Representation Summary:

I am writing to express my objection of the proposed gravel and sand quarry on Woodrising road. I was greatly disappointed to have to find out about this through social media instead of my local council.
This proposed plan will negatively affect wildlife and ecosystems around the area in a time when governments and local councils should be looking for ways to protect flora and fauna (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49892209). It will not only have an impact on wildlife but on our neighbourhoods too, with an increase of heavy traffic, noise, dust and produce an eyesore within one of the most beautiful parts of this county. Furthermore, the area is used by dog walkers, horse riders, cyclists, walkers and families with young children. As a neighbourhood and a community, we believe that a gravel and sand quarry does not belong in our beautiful local area and are completely against it.


Thank you for your time and consideration and I look forward to hearing from you.

Full text:

I am writing to express my objection of the proposed gravel and sand quarry on Woodrising road. I was greatly disappointed to have to find out about this through social media instead of my local council.
This proposed plan will negatively affect wildlife and ecosystems around the area in a time when governments and local councils should be looking for ways to protect flora and fauna (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49892209). It will not only have an impact on wildlife but on our neighbourhoods too, with an increase of heavy traffic, noise, dust and produce an eyesore within one of the most beautiful parts of this county. Furthermore, the area is used by dog walkers, horse riders, cyclists, walkers and families with young children. As a neighbourhood and a community, we believe that a gravel and sand quarry does not belong in our beautiful local area and are completely against it.


Thank you for your time and consideration and I look forward to hearing from you.

Object

Preferred Options consultation document

Representation ID: 98937

Received: 30/10/2019

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Basey-Fisher

Representation Summary:

Objection to mineral extraction site MIN116

Full text:

Objection to mineral extraction site MIN116