Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan Representations - by respondent Volume 6 of 11 Respondent numbers 2994 - 3754 2994 29886 2994 29886 2997 29895 2997 29895 3001 29896 3001 29896 John Wilson From: Nottinghamshire County Council <[email protected]> Sent: 21 March 2016 09:11 To: Subject: Representation received. ID:29306 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Mr Paul Tunaley, Thank you for your representation which we received as follows: Representation ID: 29306 Document: Minerals Local Plan Submission Draft Section: MP2o ‐ Coddington Support/Object: Object I strongly object on the grounds of the additional heavy traffic burden on the already chaotic road system around Newark, the negative environmental impact on the local amenities (Stapleford Woods, Newark Air Museum, The Newark Showground), the potential adverse effects on local air quality and the consequential effects on the health and welfare of the local population, and the huge loss of agricultural land. CHANGE TO PLAN The Coddington option should be removed from the Plan The document is unsound because it is not: ii. Justified iii. Effective How you would like your representation to be considered at the independent examination: Written representation. This email is acknowledgement of the receipt of your representation. It is NOT confirmation that the representation has yet been registered. You will not receive any further notification by email that your representation has been registered until the end of the participation period. 1 3026 30027 25.03.2016 Dear Sir or Madam Re: Proposed Inclusion of Flash Farm to the Minerals Local Plan I am strongly opposed to the proposed quarry at Flash Farm, Newark on Trent for the following reasons: 1) Demand – I do not believe that under the current climate there is the requirement for the quantities of material that is to be extracted from the Flash Farm site. In the Nottinghamshire and Nottingham Local Aggregates Assessment – April 2015 it states: The latest 10 year average production figures have fallen for all aggregate minerals since the first LAA was compiled in 2011. The three year averages for sand and gravel and Sherwood Sandstone over the same period have seen very small increase. The report goes on to state that: Based on the current evidence it is not considered that there is a need to amend the demand forecast set out in the emerging Minerals Local Plan as the 2011 LAA figures take into account of both a period of economic growth and recession. There are no significant infrastructure projects taking place in or around Newark on Trent other than proposed housing estates. However, the construction of houses only utilises 20% of the aggregates used therefore it is safe to say that the majority of this material will be exported out of the county, as identified in Section 3.7 of the Nottinghamshire and Nottingham Local Aggregates Assessment – April 2015, and in doing so add to the local road congestion. When widening the A46 there was significant excess in the cut volumes that had to be removed from the site and this is often the case when trying to achieve a sustainable design and reduce resource utilisation. 2) Environment – Averham Village sits in the flood plain of the River Trent (E.A. flood zone 2/3) and the creation of such a large deep void to the north of the village could have a significant impact on the free draining capability of the topography. This should be taken fully into consideration and advice sought from the Environmental Agency of the impact on the village. 3) Ecology – Flash Farm has a considerable number hedgerows that are home to a number of species of birds that are categorised as ‘rare and declining’ and the removal of the hedgerows will have an impact on the bird numbers. There are also considerable wild flowers that attract many species of butterfly which are currently in decline. 4) Noise, Nuisance and Visual Intrusion – The extraction and movement of aggregates is undertaken by large tracked vehicles which will be heard throughout the extended periods proposed for the development. The A617 creates significant noise at peak times but beyond this the ambiance is quite tranquil and the sound of revering sirens, crushing plant and continuous conveyors will have an impact on the local residents. By their very nature, sand and gravel are very dusty when being extracted and transported. Although not a hazard to human health the dust can become a nuisance to property situated locally to the development. The quarry will require significant dust suppression particularly in the summer period and it is hoped that the water will be from a sustainable source. My property is approximately 100m away from the edge of the proposed quarry. During the presentation by Mick George Ltd. they presented a drawing that shows soil mounds over 5m in height to provide visual screening against the quarry. I believe that this will have a drastic impact on my view from my Sun Room and the rear of my property 5) Transport – The A617 is a major route between Lincoln and Newark to Nottingham has significant levels of medium and heavy goods vehicles. Kelham Bridge is continuously a bottleneck and creates significant tailbacks at peak times. There have also been a significant number of road traffic accidents that have blocked the road for significant periods of time. These conditions make it difficult for emergency vehicles to reach the villages to the west of Newark. The increased volume of traffic by the vehicle movements from the quarry will just compound the current situation. The proposed access to the quarry is situated between the two sets of traffic lights just after Averham Village. Considering that this road has a speed limit of fifty miles per hour I believe that the proposed junction has the potential for causing accidents on a very busy road. Yours sincerely Neil Wright MSc. C Eng MICE MAPM ICIOB 3037 29242 3037 29242 3037 30001 From: Frances Overbury > Sent: 08 March 2016 20:43 To: Development Planning Subject: Formal Objection Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Nottinghamshire County Council, I am writing to lodge a personal objection to the Local Minerals Plan for Coddington. Please can you confirm receipt of this email? I am very concerned about the terrible pressure all the additional traffic will cause around Newark especially at the already strained junctions of the A17, A46 and A1. Also the traffic through our village will no doubt increase. Also the dangers faced by our young daughter who is now 2 years old. We live very close to the site and she will be attending the local Coddington school which is also in a potentially affected proximity. I am also very worried about the affects to our property, dust, foundations and house price and also the affects to our beautiful neighbouring woodlands. We object as a family and believe that the Coddington site is not suitable because of the overwhelming deficits to the plan. Regards, Mrs Frances Overbury ) Sent from my iPhone Frances Overbury BA(Hons) Dip. CMIT MIMIT Piano Tuner & Technician for the East Midlands 1 Office use only Person No: 3038 Part A – Personal details Rep Nos: 29719 Personal details Agent details (where applicable) Title Dr First name Liz Last name Mossop Address line 1 Address line 2 Address line 3 Postcode Email For those replying on behalf of an organisation or group: Organisation Job title If you are replying on behalf of an organisation or group, how was the response approved and how many people does it represent? N/A Do you wish to be notified of any of the following? (please tick as appropriate) The submission of the Mineral Local Plan for independent examination X The publication of the recommendations of the inspector X The adoption of the Minerals Local Plan X If agent details are provided contact will be made through them unless otherwise instructed. If your representation(s) is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate at the oral part of the examination? Please note that if you do not participate at the oral examination your representations will be dealt with as written representations and carry the same weight as those presented orally. Yes, I wish to participate at No, I do not wish to participate X the oral examination at the oral examination If you would like to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary. Please note that participation in the oral hearing sessions is at the discretion of the Inspector. Signature N/A – electronic submission Date 28 March 2016 Name Liz Mossop If you are submitting your representation electronically you do not need to provide a signature. Office use only Part B – Your representation Person No: 3038 Rep No: 29719 Please read the guidance note before completing this section. 1. To which part of the document does this representation relate? Policy MP2 Site code Map/Plan Paragraph 4.15 Other 2. Do you consider the identified part of the document to be: Legally compliant? Yes X No Sound? Yes X No If you do not consider the identified part of the document to be sound, please continue to question 3. In other cases please go to question 4. If you think the identified part of the document is not legally compliant and is unsound and therefore want to answer ‘no’ to both parts of this question, please fill in two separate forms. 3. Do you consider the identified part of the document to be unsound because it is not: (1) Positively (4) Consistent with No (2) Justified? No (3) Effective? No No prepared? national policy? You can select more than one test if you feel it is appropriate.