1. Hi can you answer a question for me, if you wanted to build an extension/patio or any other sort of building work to your property how would you do it ?, if it wasn't for the quarries doing this you could not build, or repair the roads that YOU drive on. The quarries down in Cornwall and the one at Blackhill have been grassed and had trees planted, so give nature time to take hold and you will not notice the scar.

  2. 1. Most of the old quarry sites I see around devon aren't restored, they are just moth balled. It is cheaper that way, and they just stay as scars on the landscape.
    2. If DCC really wants this sand out of the ground in could be done locally and they could retain their assets, rather than siphoning them off to a foreign company.
    3. The only people I ever hear making comments like yours actually work for Holcim or similar. How very clever of you...

  3. So AI plan to extract 1.2 m tonnes of aggregate over five years from Straitgate Farm, transporting the material to Blackhill for processing. We have assurances about the number of trucks being little more than those which have hauled from Marsh Broadmoor to Blackhill,
    I understand that the permission to process at Blackhill runs out in December 2016, just twenty months away. Where will the material then be processed? It is highly likely that a suitable area will be cleared to erect a processing plant at Straitgate, which will then make it more economical to excavate the next 1.8 M tonnes without the need for transport but with the cost of removing unsuitable Ottery Sand, but the district is short of sand? Should this happen, will it then become economical to extract the whole 8 M tonnes of aggregate, despite upsetting the water table?
    I believe we are not getting the whole story, AI must make it clear where they expect to process material after December 2016 or my supposition may become fact. I understand that we need aggregates, the initial plan is not too unreasonable, but if it develops we could see a massive hole in the landscape for the next thirty years.

  4. I wish to comment on the note on this website posted on Sunday 16th about remarks I made at the West Hill hustings.

    In your post (presumably by Roger Giles as he was the only person taking copious notes in the meeting), it implies that I really do not care about the quarry or it’s impact on the environment which is not true. What I was trying to talk about at the hustings whilst being rudely interrupted by Councillor Giles (who then was rebuffed by another Councillor) was that we needed robust assurances in place by the quarry company before deliberation and we have not received them yet. In addition, some of the environmental issues highlighted as key concerns by some people have no strong scientific foundation and could be interpreted differently by experts and for both these reasons my personal view is that we do not have enough information yet to deliberate on a proper evidential basis. Therefore I cannot oppose this proposal yet. But that also means that I cannot support it yet either! I would only support it in any case if proper environmental safeguards and bonds were in place. Had I been elected, I would have been seeking assurances on these issues. I did not say that ‘you cannot get access to the documentaion’ as quoted, I said that I had not accessed key information which is different - that would be down to me if elected. The information on this website for example (which I was referred to has an understandable slant to it (it is after all a pressure group website with a single purpose) which therefore and understandably has to be questioned.