Within the extraction boundary proposed by Aggregate Industries in its plans to quarry Straitgate Farm there are places where there is zero recoverable sand and gravel; in other places less than 1m.
How is it sustainable to remove, handle, store, put back, more than 2m of topsoil and overburden, best and most versatile agricultural land, to extract less than 1m of sand and gravel? The answer is – it's not.
The plan below overlays the revised maximum water table contours – the base of any quarry – over the ground elevation contours. The difference between the contours is the amount of material above the maximum water table, including soil and overburden. If we assume the soil and overburden is on average 2.28m thick, as stated in the Parkhouse Report 1990, we can arrive at the available resource.
We find that within the extraction boundary there are clearly areas with little or no available resource.
And it may be worse than that. The new resource statement puts the overburden at 600,000m3. Across 22.6ha, an area of 226,000m2, that works out as a soil and overburden thickness of 2.65m.
This all ties in with what they knew in 1967. We’ve posted about it before. Namely, in one particular area there is no material worth recovering.
In June 2018, the Environment Agency confirmed to us in an email:
The large circle cut out of the quarry area in the 1967 plan is in the area where groundwater levels are close to the ground surface. Therefore, working in part of this area may not be possible in any case.
In August 2018, Devon County Council acknowledged in an email to Aggregate Industries:
... from talking to the EA that there are areas within the proposed working that may not be workable due to the groundwater levels. Whilst we wouldn’t require new plans overall as it’s within the red line area, we would definitely require it to be clearly shown within the working area drawings and also factored into the resource assessment so that the impact on the planning balance can be assessed.
So, where, clearly shown, is this area on the new working drawings? Nowhere to be seen. The reason? Aggregate Industries pushed back – in this now superseded document – claiming "the extraction area, as shown on the Wood E&IS plan, remains unchanged":
The change... results in no area being "excluded for reasons of groundwater protection" but merely a localised effect on the depth of working in a localised (eastern) part of the site.
Good try, but wrong. From the overlaid contours above it's as clear as day that this localised area has no recoverable resource. So why is it still within the extraction boundary?
