An alternative proposal eliminating pedestrian and HGV conflict, put forward by traffic consultants working on behalf of the local community, has apparently been dismissed by both AI and DCC.
MP Sir Hugo Swire has recently warned DCC that "road safety and the transport of children is causing me real concern". DCC’s response was that:
My officers have been discussing details of the proposal with the school travel team and have suggested to the applicant ways in which this might be resolved to ensure that the proposal does not increase the danger to children who are picked up or dropped off at this point.
It might, for example, be agreed that AI would restrict HGV movements to outside the times the lane is used by schoolchildren.
Sounds fantastic, except it wouldn’t work. With a haul route that’s 46 miles long, it would be impossible to restrict HGVs from turning up inside restricted times. Where would they wait, having arrived at the wrong time? On the A30? On the Daisymount junction?
But ignoring that, has AI has made a success of similar promises elsewhere? Of course not.
HGV movement restrictions were agreed between Burlescombe Primary School and AI for its Westleigh Quarry. Burlescombe Parish Council has recently objected to AI’s application to extract an additional 600,000 tonnes at Westleigh Quarry, making these comments regarding the school:
3) We would also like to point out the negative effects the Quarry HGV’s are having on Burlescombe Primary School: a. They have effectively stunted the growth of the school due to parents concerns over the safety of their children wholly generated by lorry movements past the school at all times of the day. b. There had been a verbal agreement with the previous head teacher concerning lorry movement restrictions (an agreement to stop and wait) within school drop-off and pick-up times (not always upheld). We would request that this agreement is formalised.
c) SS: 7.8 to 7.19 — Whilst accepting that the current proposal remains within the current permissions, a majority of residents who have voiced their opinions in Open Forum’s or online to the Council feel strongly that the rules are continuously broken — lorries travelling through Burlescombe in convoy, within restricted times around school drop-off and pick-up times, in excess of the speed limits, and un-sheeted. We request that no permission is granted to this application until an alternative route to the one through Burlescombe Village is reexamined fully.
In other words, even when the quarry is less than a mile away – trucks still turn up during restricted times.
A villager made this video in 2014 to show the impact of HGVs on children and the primary school. The included text speaks for itself:
This is the true plight of a village being trampled on by a multi national conglomerate with the backing of the district council taken over 8 years ago the lorry movement within the village has got significantly worse. This video demonstrates the shocking way in which a small village community have to live in fear of taking their children safely to school. how their local environment is polluted with noise and dust to the extent that washing cannot be hung out without becoming soiled, fish ponds have become polluted and murky no matter how good a filtration system, in the summer windows cannot be left open at night for fresh air because of the noise and vibrations our roads are now cracking up under the constant thunder of these vehicles and of course our children's primary school is right next to this road which is constantly under a dust cloud which our children are breathing in It appears that the DCC planners only duty of care involved here is making sure the quarry makes another pound at the cost of the ever diminishing quality of life to the local residents of Burlescombe and now they want to increase it more by building a hot tarmac silo so that they can run all night when ever it suits them. WE KNOW THE QUARRY LIE E.G working below the water table, contravening the 106 clause. THEY ALWAYS HAVE THEY ALWAYS WILL THEY ALWAYS OFFER VOLUNTARY ASSURANCES TO PLACATE BUT NEVER STICK TO THEIR WORD. SO WHY SHOULD WE BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD STICK TO A VOLUNTARY RESTRICTION
