Last year, we posted Hertford Bengeo quarry application rejected again by Hertfordshire County Council. There were considerable concerns about dust from the proposed sand and gravel quarry:
Dr David Adam, an ecologist from Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, spoke against the application, telling councillors that particles from the quarry travel far further than its limits and posed a significant health risk.
The applicant appealed. Following a public inquiry, the Planning Inspectorate recommended the appeal be dismissed. Two paragraphs from the Inspector's report on dust:
281. The effects on air quality and health were raised by about 90% of the objectors. Many consider that the scheme would have a detrimental impact on air quality and would pose health issues for local residents, especially for children at Bengeo School and using the playing fields. The proposed quarry site is 350 metres away, opposite the primary school with a large staff supporting more than 500 three to eleven year olds. Dust from the quarry would contain tiny crystal particles. Research based on the monitoring of workers in a quarry digging up the same sand and gravel has found it to contain carcinogens. There is an undoubted risk of exposure to fine particles of silica dust. This is a fact that is acknowledged by numerous bodies and is indeed referenced in the consultation document for the eMLP. Inhalation of silica dust is known (UK HSE) to cause health issues, including lung disease, silicosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer.
302. There is no reliable evidence on how much silica dust would pollute the air around the quarry. On average it forms 15% of PM10 dust for a lot of quarries. Details about the size-distribution and composition of the material in the Kesgrave formation would be needed to do so, but is absent. The HIA should be based on relevant observational science not models and regulations. Carcinogenic RCS dust is a hazard, but the HIA relies on dust not being generated, which has not been the experience at other sites. Personnel working at the quarry under HSE regulations would need to wear protective clothing, but such stringent rules would not apply to the general public in the locality. It only takes a very small amount of airborne RCS dust to create a health hazard. Some US states have set stringent silica exposure guidelines, which would be exceeded if the proposed quarry resulted in 1.5 µg/m3 of silica per 10 µg/m3 increase in PM10. The residents of Bengeo should not be exposed to this obvious risk. Site specific observations should have been taken to exclude the risk of exposure to this highly toxic and carcinogenic material. Defra limits do not give a level at which there can be confidence that no health effects would result.
There were a multitude of other concerns too – including on hydrogeology – and last week, no doubt to the relief of the people of Hertford and the nearby primary school, the Secretary of State endorsed the Inspector's decision:
The Secretary of State considers that the impact on landscape and character, and hydrogeology each carry substantial weight against the proposal.
The risk of contaminating groundwater would give rise to an adverse effect of moderate significance, which should given substantial weight because of the implications for the public water supply ... the absence of an appropriate mechanism and planning condition to safeguard the aquifer, ... would pose an unacceptable risk to groundwater pollution.
The Planning Inspectorate's and Secretary of State's reports can be found here.
Delighted for #Bengeo residents that everyone’s efforts to stop this application has succeeded. Thanks to local campaigners, councillors and HertsCC. A real team effort! https://t.co/i0McNnwazQ— Mark Prisk MP (@PriskMark) April 4, 2019
