WRITE AN OBJECTION LETTER - key points
HIGHWAYS - 110 truck movement on the off the Site on to A5. Concerned about volume of traffic. Current road systems struggle at peak times and problem on A3 and M1 result in traffic jams in Towcester. This is WITHOUT extra trucks. Its a 50 MPH road. How will they get up to speed with out causing traffic or danger to other users.
EVIDENCE OF NEED - no substantial evidence provided that the quantities of building aggregate, roofing stone and 'pury stone ' are needed in these quantities based on Local Aggregates Assessment. Link to Resource Plan?LOSS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND - National Planning Policy Framework says that planning decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the country side .40.5 % (typo?) of the application site will involve in the the loss of. 'best and most versatile agricultural land - for the duration of the operation and perhaps forever which is harmful impact.
ARCHEOLOGY - To date only a desk top evaluation. Total disregard for the historical importance of the site. Local historians have significant research to show that site is in close proximity to Boudica's last and most famous battle. A topic of great local historical importance.HYDROLOGY - residents are concerned about the ground water pollution to water supply. This has been badly managed with the existing quarry on Westy Road to date. Rather than criticise Bird, can you suggest that local observations have shown standing water in the field for most of the winter and therefore can expect a lot of water needs to be removed come excavation?
LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT- site is 22.5 hectares. The Local Impact Visual Assessment does not adequately show the views of the proposed area fro the surrounding settlements . All current viewpoints do not allow appropriate consideration to the impact of proposed development and were taken in high Summer where vegetation is in full leaf. The LIVA particularly does not accurately demonstrate the visibility of the site by the new housing at Furlongs and closest dwellings at 300m away. Request an Independant Landscape Consultant . I think that the Fulongs are 200-250 metres away. Closer.
BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN - Only just meets the statutory requirement which is disappointing given the size and impact that the proposed site wil have on the natural environment.
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY IMPACT - Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy states that developments 'minimise pollution from noise, air and run off.
NOISE - The Noise impact assessment provided by the applicant should be carefully examined by Officers or external specialist consultant.. Operational noise and operating hours are of maximum concern by residents. This affecting surrounding residential amenity.
DUST. - need a Dust Management Plan. Current provision in now way adequate for proper assessment.
LIGHT - 'Lighting during working hours and winter months ' mentioned in the application but no more details and no mention of security lights for site. Inadequate details for lighting provision and the visual impact for both local residents and wildlife.
HEALTH AND WELLBEING - Air Quality is a major concern. 17 hours of operational activity and pollutants 6 days per week. Unreasonable for the physical and mental health of residents. Existing quarry operation have vexed residents. Lorries waiting in road to enter quarry and debris /mud on the road
PRE APPLICATION ENGAGEMENT - Despite presentation to Paulerspury Parish Council in 25th July 2024 inadequate provision of any consultation with local business and residents as to the details and scale of this application.
JOBS - the proposed application would not provide many jobs .8 positions in total and of limited benefit to the local economy. "material harm to economic development interests at Concept Park, The Race course as well as the planned housing demand in the locality OMISSIONS - the proposed fails to mention Pury End and its residents and the Furlongs in any details . As the closest 'dwellings' this is suprising. The listed building Kirby Farm House also has a cursory mention. Vibration damage to a listed building not addressed . Visual impact , noise dust light pollution are sure to affect the residents of Pury End. Further to this it is misleading that an old google map (pre Furlongs ) development is used to show the site.
WRITE AN OBJECTION LETTER - areas to disccus
The scale of operation is not in keeping with the location. Sandwiched between a new housing development in Towcester and the villages of Pury End and Paulerspury. The applicant is also seeking to extract almost twice the provision set out in the Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan’ (MWLP forthwith)
The MWLP states under section 4.40 ‘any proposal for development of an allocation will still need to meet the requirements set out in the Local Plan’ this application fails to meet the Plans provisions, Aiming to almost double the extraction rates.
Firstly, A. Section 1.2 states:
The Local Plan identifies what minerals and waste related development should go where, why it should go there, and how by doing so, it can make other land use and infrastructure systems function better. It considers the impact and design of new minerals and waste development, and focuses on how this development can best relate to the surrounding land use and link with the wider community.
Clearly adding an additional 100 additional HGV journeys off the already congested A5 will not make the infrastructure system function better.
Also, it is not focused on how this development best relates to the surrounding land use and the wider community has simply been over looked, literally! The development on its north to south slope will enable the residents of Pury End & Paulerspury to look straight into the site, irrespective of the over burden bund height.
B; Section 1.3 states:
It is also intended to act as a driver for new investment and identifies how investment in minerals and waste development can be optimised for everyone's benefit. It focuses, and where appropriate, integrates minerals and waste development activity and investment with other development and investment in the county. As such it is referred to as a 'spatial plan'.
This application is not ‘optimised for everyone’s benefit’ on the contrary it serves to benefit only those with a financial interest in the site.
C: Section 4.10
Policy 1: Providing for an adequate supply of aggregates
Provision will be made over the plan period 2011 to 2031 for the extraction of:
7.8 million tonnes of crushed rock (limestone) (equivalent to an annual average of 0.39 million tonnes) provided from deposits outside unworked river valleys or from sites with old permissions upgraded to modern conditions.
The maintenance of a landbank of at least seven years for sand and gravel, and at least ten years for crushed rock will be sought.
This provision will come from both extensions to existing sites and new sites if they meet the spatial strategy for mineral extraction and are assessed as meeting environmental, amenity and other requirements of the Local Plan. Allocations to meet the required provision are identified in the Local Plan.
The scale of operation is simply not needed. The plan was budgeted for 7.8Mt over the course of 20 years, this enables the land bank to be maintained above the governments requirements of ten years.
From 2012 to 2022,
7,600,000 tonnes of crushed stone have already been quarried and the landbank stands at 27 years.
In addition Harlestone quarry has had permission granted for total of 895,000 tonnes and operations started in spring 2024.
D; section 4.45
Crushed rock (limestone)
Both the Harlestone and Pury End Quarry Extensions have been allocated primarily for their contribution to the provision of building stone (under Policy 7) but will also contribute to crushed rock provision (combined estimated provision of 1.66 Mt).
‘Primarily for their contribution to the provision of building stone’ the application comprises extraction of 1,576,000 tonnes of which only 50,000 tonnes is allocated for building stone, a mere 3.17%. This demonstrates the want for profit over the NMWLP’s objectives.
E; Section 4.46
The two sites allocated for crushed rock have a total estimated provision of 1.66 Mt. This, in addition to the estimated committed reserves of 9.86 Mt (at 1 January 2016) and sales of 1.1 Mt (for the period 2011 - 2015), equates to a total of 12.62 Mt, and will meet the required provision of 11.7 Mt for the plan period plus maintenance of landbanks at the end of the plan period (with an overprovision of 0.92 Mt).
The combined proposed sites of Harlestone and Pury End have a ‘combined estimated provision’ for crushed rock of 1.66Mt yet the applicant aims to take 1,576,000 tonnes at Pury End alone, again demonstrating a disregard for the NMWLP and the wider community.
F; section 5:
Sites for the Provision of crushed rock.
M7: Pury End Quarry Extension (limestone and building stone)
0.85 million tonnes (approximately)
The application wishes to almost double this.
All of the above clearly demonstrates a disregard for the Northamptonshire Mineral and Waste Local Plan, a plan that is meant to ensure a controlled and regulated extraction process, thus protecting the wider community. The shear audacity to almost double the extraction rates, in a time when it’s simply not needed, focusing on those areas that are more profitable and ignoring the primary contribution requirement of Pury Stone, should speak volumes.
To conclude the applicant has no regard for the NMWLP, the wider community of Towcester, Pury End and Paulerspury and is in breach of said the plans extraction requirements. Therefore planning permission should not be granted.