Simon Jupp MP ‘unable to support this application’

DCC planning officers couldn't even get the name right

Devon County Council's planning officers have had more than six years to get things right.

The report recommending approval of Aggregate Industries' scheme to quarry Straitgate Farm starts: 

1.1 The application is for the development of a new sand and gravel quarry... at Stairgate Farm. 

The officer’s report contains a multitude of material errors, inconsistencies and misleading statements, and a list has now been sent to Devon County Council to circulate to the Planning Committee before tomorrow’s decision. 

More importantly, a Pre-Action Protocol Letter for Judicial Review has also been sent to the Council. 

In response, the Council has now issued three pages of hastily revised conditions.

The Development Management Committee meeting to decide Straitgate's fate will be held tomorrow, 1 December at 2.15pm. 

The meeting will be livestreamed – the link can be found here.

DCC officers recommend approval of AI’s application to quarry Straitgate Farm

In 1968, "the Minister [was] anxious to safeguard such valuable agricultural land." 

Today, however, it should come as no surprise to readers – who will have long smelt the direction of travel, long sensed the approaching stitch-up – that Devon County Council planning officers are recommending councillors approve Aggregate Industries’ controversial and flawed scheme to quarry Straitgate Farm and decimate its best and most versatile agricultural land.

The recommendation comes despite the plethora of material issues still outstanding, despite the impact to drinking water supplies, despite having no idea if a surface water management scheme is even feasible, despite the 2.5 million mile haulage scheme, despite the 23 million tonne resource of sand and gravel already sitting next door to the processing plant, 23 miles closer, despite warnings that approval at this stage would be unlawful. 

But as we said, this should come as no surprise. The writing was on the wall back in 2012, when selecting sites for inclusion in the Minerals Plan the Minerals Officer rejected nine others in a sham site appraisal exercise in favour of Straitgate, a site with a claimed 3.6 million tonnes, and the only site owned by Aggregate Industries. Even the Environment Agency recognised "some of the excluded sites may be preferable in environmental terms." 

The writing was still on the wall in 2017, when – with the recoverable resource now barely 1 million tonnes – it was made abundantly clear that Devon County Council’s job was to deliver Straitgate for the Swiss-owned multinational cement conglomerate. We posted: 

Aggregate Industries’ quest to quarry Straitgate Farm has been a long-running and sorry saga. Anyone hoping that its latest planning application would be decided on its merits – weighing up the multitude of conflicting issues – will be disappointed. 

Since 2017, there has been nothing but problems. Devon County Council has however favoured Aggregate Industries with 13 extensions of time for determination. In return, the company has been unwilling to supply information on various fundamental parts of the application, not only on the impact on the A30 and B3174 from the dairy cows that would need to cross Ottery’s main road 4x daily between replacement pasture and milking parlour, but also on the crucial issue of surface water management. The latter was, according to Devon County Council:

...so important in terms of the likely significant impacts of the proposal the MPA would wish to ensure that a SWM scheme can be designed to meet all of the requirements identified in advance of the determination of this application. 

This "so important" issue has now been left to resolve post determination – beyond the eyes of public scrutiny – which not only makes a mockery of the last 6 years and the process of Environmental Impact Assessment, but is, according to legal advice we have received, unlawful. Recent case law says: 

...a planning authority cannot rely on conditions and undertakings as a surrogate for the EIA process. It cannot conclude that a development is unlikely to have significant effects on the environment simply because all such effects are likely to be eliminated by measures that will be carried out by the developer pursuant to conditions and/or undertakings. 

Obviously, the planning officer’s report will now be scrutinised. As we know, planning committee reports are 'a fertile ground for judicial review challenges'. An earlier FOI request revealed that the case officer has already admitted privately that: 

some of the issues may have to be "seen" to have been discounted if we are to avoid JR on this one... 

Councillors will vote on the application at the DMC meeting on Wednesday 1 December.

Those dependent on the site for their drinking water will hope that councillors do the right thing.

Determination date set – finally

After more than 6 years, Devon County Council is now sufficiently confident to put Aggregate Industries' disastrous planning application for Straitgate Farm and parallel application for haulage all the way to Hillhead, before the planning committee on 1 December 2021, at 2.15pm.

Agenda papers are expected to be published on 23 November, and will be available here.

‘pH of water supplies could fall to 5 or less’ – so what remedy in Straitgate’s S106?

The Environment Agency is supposed to know about water.

Professor Brassington says a quarry at Straitgate Farm would cause surrounding private water supplies to become too acidic to drink.

In June 2020, the Environment Agency advised Devon County Council, in an email now released through an FOI request, that Professor Brassington: 

…asserts that quarrying would cause the pH to exceed the Drinking Water Standard, but a Drinking Water Standard for pH does not actually exist. 

However, the Environment Agency was wrong. 

In a letter last week to the Council, Professor Brassington wrote: 

At the moment the acidity of the water (measured by its pH) is low around 6.5 pH units. The EA state that there are no regulations regarding the pH of drinking water, however they are wrong. The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2016 for England in Schedule 2 Indicator parameters states on line 7 that the Hydrogen ion should lie between 9.5 (maximum) and 6.5 (minimum) as measured as a pH value at the consumers’ taps...

Reducing the travel time will mean that less carbonate materials are dissolved and so the pH will fall. I intuitively feel that it could get to pH 5 or even less. 

...as the pH scale is logarithmic the difference between pH 6.5 and pH 5 is fifteen-fold 

It is my view that Devon County Council should not grant permission for this proposal as it will result in severe problems to private water supplies that will become too acidic to drink. 

Here are The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2016 and The Private Water Supplies (England) Regulations 2016 which do indeed state – just as Prof Brassington said – that tap water should have a pH between 6.5 and 9.5:

How embarrassing that the Environment Agency of all people should not know this. How much else do they claim to know, but don’t? After all, the Environment Agency has been taken in by Aggregate Industries' assertion that groundwater speeds through the unsaturated zone in a matter of days, when peer-reviewed scientific papers say it takes years.

Devon County Council has previously said it would be "guided by the views of the Environment Agency who retain professionals qualified in this technical field." 

Where does this leave the Council, who has put such faith in the technical competence of the Environment Agency? 

Where does this leave the Council, knowing Aggregate Industries’ proposal to quarry Straitgate Farm would cause private water supplies to become too acidic to drink, for more than 100 people, for businesses, and for Grade I listed Cadhay?

Where does this leave the Council, when the S106 Draft Heads of Terms – the only such document so far seen by stakeholders, with little more than two weeks before determination – provides no remedy should pH breach unacceptable levels?

The Environment Agency's proposed conditions, 31 January 2020, say: 

In its water quality provisions, the S106 agreement shall include pH.

The draft S106 Heads of Terms shared with stakeholders references pH only once: 

The content of an annual monitoring report that will include: f)  A review of water quality data, including pH levels;

But being contained in a monitoring report, which may or may not be delivered years late, is one thing. Doing anything about it is a completely different matter.

DCC Highways offers no objection – but answers nothing

Devon County Highways, as the Local Highways Authority, the LHA, has taken 4 years to produce a response to Aggregate Industries’ planning application to quarry Straitgate Farm. It needn’t have bothered. It answers nothing.

In 2017, the Council’s case officer told Aggregate Industries: 

…in order to assess the potential highway safety impacts the MPA needs to have reliable information on existing and potential agricultural crossings of the Exeter Road and, in particular how this would be controlled in the future in the interests of highway safety.

Reliable information on the impact of agricultural crossings has not been provided. EDDC objected. 

On 12 August 2021, the same case officer wrote to the LHA: 

I’d be really grateful if you could take onboard the comments from East Devon DC in your response – especially as AI still seem to be leaving the real impact of the quarry/cattle crossing/farm viability to us to consider with no real evidence that they wont be causing problems down the line – except their say-so. 

Does the LHA answer this? No. 

The case officer also wrote: 

The other (late) issue I have been presented with is the tree officer saying that the road access sections don’t include the trees he was concerned about and he still isn’t convinced that the gravel path won’t impact on the third party tree. Given that AI will need our agreement to do any works in the highway verge I’m assuming that the control would be with us and we wouldn’t permit any construction that could impact on that tree or they will probably sue us? So we do have the control? I just need you to confirm that and I will go back to AI and tell them that (and explain in my report). 

Does the LHA answer this? No. 

The case officer also wrote: 

The SAG are chasing about why we didn’t think the Vectos access through Little Straitgate was a less damaging alternative (in terms of hedgerow/tree loss). My recollection was that it was in the wrong place in terms of highway safety but if there’s any chance of clarifying that in your final response it would help me to deal with that point?

Does the LHA answer this? No. 

In 2018, Vectos transport consultants put forward an alternative site access to Devon County Council. As it turns out, this alternative had already been considered behind the scenes by Aggregate Industries. Vectos said the alternative site access:

...would remove many of the local concerns and provide comparative advantages, which include… Improved safety for children waiting for school buses at Birdcage Lane/Toadpit Lane junction… Removal of threat of injunction and legal action against Council from the neighbouring landowner whose property would be damaged… [whilst] Visibility for right-turning quarry traffic exiting at this widened junction would not be significantly different to the visibility at the Exeter Road/Birdcage Lane junction.

Aggregate Industries has failed to include a comparison of environmental effects for this alternative in its Environmental Statement. Planning guidance says:  

...where alternatives have been considered, paragraph 2 of Schedule 4 [of The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations] requires the applicant to include in their Environmental Statement a description of the reasonable alternatives studied (for example in terms of development design, technology, location, size and scale) and an indication of the main reasons for selecting the chosen option, including a comparison of the environmental effects. Paragraph: 041 Reference ID: 4-041-20170728 

So, how could Devon County Council, without a "comparison of the environmental effects", lawfully conclude that the development would be acceptable?

The LHA's response is remiss in other areas too. On traffic surveys, the LHA reports: 

...the LHA does not dispute the number of vehicle movements as described in the TA.

The LHA ignores the fact that the traffic counts are now more than 3 years old. 

On cumulative impact of permitted development, the LHA reports:

The LHA agrees with the number of sites and residential units, plus care home that have been evaluated in the TA.

This ignores all the development that has occurred since 2018.

On collision data, the LHA reports:

The LHA agrees with the collision data put forward in the TA and does not disagree with its conclusions.  

This is despite the collision data only covering up to 2016, and only covering a short stretch of the road – conveniently ignoring a recorded fatality. The LHA's conclusion is also surprising, because although Aggregate Industries’ Transport Assessment claims: 

No collisions involving HGV’s have occurred within the three year period and none have been attributed to excessive speed.

the case officer – knowing there have been accidents on the B3174, including HGVs, many reported on this blog – asked the LHA to:

check that the basic information on accident data is in fact correct

The LHA couldn't even be bothered to do that.

DCC moves to climate-focused road repairs – so there’s even less need for Straitgate

Aggregate Industries claims "the Straitgate deposit is of importance because it can be used for surface dressings and surface course asphalt production."

However, with 23 miles separating the proposed quarry face and processing plant, any sand and gravel extracted from Straitgate Farm would have higher amounts of embodied carbon, even before processing and onward distribution is taken into account. 

Each as-dug load would require a 46-mile round trip. Each as-dug load would contain 20% silt, a waste product. In total, some 2.5 million miles of HGV haulage would be required, with effectively 500,000 miles of that for waste. 

It's lunacy. No other UK aggregates operator hauls as-dug material 23 miles for processing. No other UK aggregates operator produces sand and gravel that would have such a high carbon footprint.

This week, Devon County Council announced "an absolute game-changer":

Devon is leading the way on new approach to carbon-reduction in highway maintenance 

We are adopting a pioneering new, climate-focused approach to road maintenance that is winning plaudits nationally. 

We’re reviewing our road maintenance procedures – the materials we use, how they’re produced, how they’re used, how they’re applied, the labour required, the time it takes, how long they last, everything – to assess the carbon impact of the work we do. 

Councillor Stuart Hughes, Cabinet Member responsible for highway maintenance, said: 

"In the past, we’ve looked at road maintenance from the point of view of cost and quality. Those factors – the cost to fix something and the performance of the products – have determined how we got the job done. 

"But now we’ve got a third, and arguably most important factor – carbon impact – that is determining a new approach to road maintenance. 

"Now we’re thinking about the materials we use, and how high in carbon their production is; waste, and whether there’s a lot of waste; sustainability, and how long that repair will last. 

"It’s putting carbon-reduction at the heart of our design, alongside performance and cost." 

Councillor Andrea Davis, Cabinet Member charged with responsibility for climate change response, said: 

"The ramifications are enormous. It’s an absolute game-changer that we will not go back from. 

"We have made a public commitment that this council will be net-zero carbon by 2030, and a lot of our carbon output is from the responsibilities we have as a highway authority."

What does this mean? Road contractors will now need to show the carbon footprint of material used for Devon County Council work.

And how long will it be before the disclosure of embodied carbon is required for other markets? 

Today, at COP26, more than 100 organisations led by the UK Green Building Council are due to publish a Net Zero Whole Life Carbon Roadmap for the nation’s built environment. One of the recommendations:

Introduce the regulation of embodied carbon for new buildings and major refurbishments

The World Green Building Council has also issued "a bold new vision" that: 

By 2030, all new buildings, infrastructure and renovations will have at least 40% less embodied carbon

Could the sand and gravel resource at Straitgate become a high-embodied-carbon stranded asset?

Click to read BBC coverage of Devon's new carbon-cutting road maintenance plans! https://t.co/bgmW1l5P1g

— Devon Climate Emergency (@devonclimate) November 10, 2021

AI marking out Straitgate’s proposed site access to show DMC councillors next week

Professor sends lecture videos to EA et al.

Aggregate Industries, its water consultants Wood, the Environment Agency and Devon County Council can’t or won’t get their heads around the nature of groundwater flow through the unsaturated zone – the vadose zone, the zone that Aggregate Industries wants to remove at Straitgate Farm, the zone so important for surrounding private water supplies. This is despite countless warnings from Professor Brassington, a renowned authority on the subject. 

Aggregate Industries' consultants have claimed "recharge reaches the water table in the BSPB through unsaturated thicknesses of between approximately 3 and 10 m within between 1 and 3 days". Professor Brassington says groundwater flow through the unsaturated zone takes years, and the removal of it will in time make drinking water sources too acidic. 

In an effort to overcome this apparent lack of understanding, Professor Brassington has sent the above bodies links to a series of online mini-lectures by Professor John Selker of Oregon State University, who, Professor Brassington writes: 

...covers the flow through the vadose zone very clearly and clarifies this bit of the hydrological cycle that is often missed by hydrogeologists in our training. 

‘Greenwashing – the new climate denial’

"Greenwashing is for me now the new climate denial", says Laurence Tubiana, CEO, European Climate Foundation and a key architect of the 2015 Paris Agreement, at an Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) press conference at COP26.https://t.co/ipJfOwb4yF pic.twitter.com/E0ehD2E5Mv

— New Scientist (@newscientist) November 8, 2021

Whilst "the world is on track for disastrous levels of global heating far in excess of the limits in the Paris climate agreement", here are the latest announcements from the parent of Aggregate Industries: 

Holcim commits to at least 40% sustainable financing by 2024, putting climate action, water preservation & safety at the heart of its strategy. We joined the @globalcompact CFO Taskforce & announced the completion of two new landmark financing transactionshttps://t.co/ocib2tzX90 pic.twitter.com/InWSUvWTk4

— Holcim (@Holcim) November 9, 2021

Here are some key points that our Chief Sustainability and Innovation Officer, @AndersonMagali_, made in a discussion with a panel of experts at COP26.

Watch: https://t.co/AH4ITfzGNY#SustainableConstruction #Innovation #COP26 pic.twitter.com/tXJEBmzBdz

— Holcim (@Holcim) November 8, 2021

Clearly the greenwashing from Holcim has reached new levels, because for the world’s largest cement company – mining finite resources, destroying biodiversity, emitting millions of tonnes of CO2, contributing to climate change and hardship for millions of people – to claim "Sustainability is at the core of what we do" is simply asking people to suspend all rational thought. Lest we forget, Concrete is the most destructive material on Earth.

And the insanity continues. Did you know "The words innovation and sustainability mean the same thing"? No, neither did we. If you thought innovation was related to new ideas, and that sustainability was about meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs, Holcim wants you to think again. Not content with greenwashing, the multinational cement giant now wants to redefine the English language.

But don’t despair. Thank goodness Aggregate Industries – a company that has given up reporting its CO2 emissions – is playing its part for COP26:

Playing our part for #COP26 ♻️ We're delighted to be a trusted partner in the iconic @hope_sculpture with our bespoke ECOPact Max+ concrete used to create the low carbon and sustainable piece of art. @COP26 #BuildGreen #HopeSculpture #NetZero #COP26Legacy https://t.co/m7Y0Zmhuj7 pic.twitter.com/WyXXiLlBJH

— Aggregate Industries (@AggregateUK) November 8, 2021

It's hard to believe, given its multi-million-mile haulage plans for Straitgate, but Aggregate Industries claims to have net-zero ambitions. 

Here’s net zero explained:

“Taylor will also be able to bring forward drinking credits earned from the days he hasn’t drunk over the past forty years, meaning the actual end date for consumption may actually be 2060.” https://t.co/qDyL7s13a3

— Jeff Berardelli (@WeatherProf) November 5, 2021

A Sydney man has set an ambitious target to phase out his alcohol consumption within the next 29 years, as part of an impressive plan to improve his health.

The program will see Greg Taylor, 73, continue to drink as normal for the foreseeable future, before reducing consumption in 2049 when he turns 101. He has assured friends it will not affect his drinking plans in the short or medium term. 

Taylor said it was important not to rush the switch to non-alcoholic beverages. “It’s not realistic to transition to zero alcohol overnight. This requires a steady, phased approach where nothing changes for at least two decades,” he said, adding that he may need to make additional investments in beer consumption in the short term, to make sure no night out is worse off. 

Taylor will also be able to bring forward drinking credits earned from the days he hasn’t drunk over the past forty years, meaning the actual end date for consumption may actually be 2060. 

To assist with the transition, Taylor has bought a second beer fridge which he describes as the ‘capture and storage’ method.

EA labelled ‘irresponsible’ after appealing landmark human rights ruling

If you thought the Environment Agency existed "to create better places for people and wildlife, and support sustainable development", think again. After allowing the sewage scandal, now this: 

Lawyers have accused the EA of 'wasting time and taxpayers money' after the regulator lodged an appeal against a High Court ruling, which found that it had failed to protect the life of a five-year-old child in its regulation of the Walleys Quarryhttps://t.co/G5blQe2tz4

— ENDS Report (@TheENDSReport) November 8, 2021

Lawyers have accused the Environment Agency of 'wasting time and taxpayers money' after the regulator lodged an appeal against a High Court ruling, which found that it had failed to protect the life of a five-year-old child in its regulation of the Walleys Quarry landfill in Newcastle-under-Lyme. 

During the original hearing in September, Dr Ian Sinha from Alder Hey hospital said that unless Mathew Richards, who was born with bronchopulmonary dysplasia, had access to clean air his lungs will not recover and continued exposure to Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) emissions from the landfill site will mean that Mathew's life expectancy will inevitably be shortened.” 

The High Court ruled that the agency needed to do more to protect the local population as early as possible and that all measures must be “taken to reduce off-site odours as early as possible so that the WHO half hour guideline (5ppb) [five parts per billion] is met, addressing the undesirable current effects on people’s well-being and the symptoms they are experiencing”. 

It also said that from January 2022 off-site H2S should be reduced to below the US Environmental Protection Agency reference concentration of 1ppb. 

However, the EA was granted permission to appeal the ruling at the end of October. In its grounds for appeal, the EA argues that the judge presiding on the case “erred in deciding that judicial intervention was either justified or appropriate”. 

The EA argued that as the specialist statutory regulator, it was for itself and “not for the court, to evaluate and to determine the further action needed in order to restore gas emission levels at and in the locality of Walleys Quarry to acceptable levels and within an acceptable timescale”. 

The EA also argued that it was not found to have breached or to be breaching “positive obligation and [that there was] therefore neither a justification nor a requirement for a remedy”.  

Matthew Richard’s solicitor Rebekah Carrier, of Hopkin Murray Beskine, told ENDS that it was “astonishing” that the EA “had made extensive submissions to the Court of Appeal without even mentioning the fact that the pollution from the site is shortening Mathew’s life”.  

“Rather than waste time and public money on an academic appeal the EA should be putting their efforts into making the area safe.” 

Carrier said her legal team would “be drawing the Court of Appeal’s attention to the irresponsible failure of the EA to even mention the risk to Mathew’s health in its submissions to the court and asking the Court of Appeal to give the appeal the short shrift it deserves”.  

The Court of Appeal hearing is expected to take place before Christmas.

Is Aggregate Industries so short of money?

According to email correspondence, released through an FOI request, Aggregate Industries told Devon County Council in March 2020: 

...we are currently awaiting CAPEX approval before we can formally instruct Wood (Amec) to update the composite Maximum Winter Water Table Grid the EA requires to include the high groundwater level recorded at the site in 1990 and similarly, this is the case with one or two other issues. 

WTF. Really?? How much does it cost to update a few groundwater contours on a plan?  

It wasn’t until July 2020 that Aggregate Industries could happily report back to the Council: 

I have just had the 'green light' from the business to restart progress on the Straitgate application with the release of capital monies to complete the outstanding information. 

Goodness. Is Aggregate Industries so short of money? 

Or has the irrational pursuit of Straitgate Farm's sand and gravel devoured so much capital that strict spending limits are now in place? 

Or is the company not so bothered with Straitgate now, knowing the resource amounts to only 5% of what was originally thought possible?  

Or has the penny dropped that mineral extraction at Straitgate is never going to be profitable – not with a 46-mile round trip for processing the as-dug material, before any onward distribution, not with the current price of diesel and the shortage of HGV drivers? 

Let’s hope, if the worst happens, there’s enough money left in the kitty to actually restore the site!

Holcim at COP26

No wonder climate activists are worried that COP26 is a big PR stunt, when even cement polluters turn up to greenwash their gargantuan emissions.

Join our Chief Sustainability and Innovation Officer @AndersonMagali_ for an honest conversation with high level participants in Glasgow this afternoon. We know what needs to be done, and we know it is achievable. Now to do it.

🕑 14:00 GMT
🖥️https://t.co/WgDPyw6F8d#COP26 pic.twitter.com/tCgXXj8tKT

— Holcim (@Holcim) November 5, 2021

If we are honest? Are there times then when Holcim – parent of Aggregate Industries – is not honest??

Cement is responsible for 8% of global CO2 emissions. Thank goodness that growing demand now presents an opportunity for the world’s biggest cement producer "to change how we do things". In case Holcim has forgotten, the first COP was held 26 years ago.

"Global demand for cement is growing which represents a challenge, but we can see that as an opportunity to change how we do things. #COP26

We have to look at the full value chain from transporting products to circular building design."

📢 @Holcim CSO, @AndersonMagali_ @COP26. pic.twitter.com/Wf0gxceAGe

— We Mean Business Coalition (@WMBtweets) November 5, 2021

But when Holcim talks about looking at transportation, don’t hold your breath. If 23 miles separating proposed quarry and processing plant in Devon doesn’t make the company think twice, what will?

DCC has ‘no real evidence’ cattle crossing won’t cause problems

Aggregate Industries’ planning application to quarry Straitgate Farm has been beset by delays over the years – in part because of the cattle crossing issue: the 150 or so dairy cows that would need to cross the B3174 up to 4x daily to access alternative pasture if quarrying were to proceed, with literally who-knows-what impact on the functioning of the main road into and out of Ottery St Mary, and on the A30.

The issue was raised more than 4 years ago. In 2017, Devon County Council wanted the company "to assess the implications of the farmer moving cattle across the B3174 as a result of the proposal". This June, East Devon District Council objected, saying Aggregate Industries' transport assessment:

...offers no detailed explanation for the conclusion that "there will not be a need to intensify livestock crossings". It also fails to explain how the applicant could prevent the farmer crossing livestock over the B3174 in the event that the mitigation measures prove unsatisfactory. In the seemingly likely event that a need arises for increased crossings of the B3174, neither the existing crossing arrangements nor the approved arrangements are considered suitable given the speed of traffic, the advance visibility and the fact that delays to traffic on this road would adversely affect a large number of businesses, schools and people in Ottery St Mary, as well as the emergency services.

What progress has been achieved in the last 4 years by the great minds at Aggregate Industries & Co? Following an FOI request, we now know. According to an email on 12 August 2021 from the case officer to Devon County Highways officers: 

AI still seem to be leaving the real impact of the quarry/cattle crossing/farm viability to us to consider with no real evidence that they won't be causing problems down the line – except their say-so.

This obviously represents a problem. The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations say: 

The aim of Environmental Impact Assessment is to protect the environment by ensuring that a local planning authority when deciding whether to grant planning permission for a project, which is likely to have significant effects on the environment, does so in the full knowledge of the likely significant effects, and takes this into account in the decision making process. Paragraph: 002 Reference ID: 4-002-20140306 

Transport Assessments should include: 

...movements across all modes of transport that would result from the development and in the vicinity of the site; [and] an assessment of the likely associated environmental impacts of transport related to the development. Paragraph: 015 Reference ID: 42-015-20140306 

Policy M22 of the Devon Minerals Plan says: 

Mineral development will be permitted where it can be demonstrated, where appropriate through a Transport Assessment or Statement, that it would not have a significant effect on: (a) road safety; or (b) the capacity and functionality of the transportation network for all users.

So, how – "with no real evidence that [AI] won’t be causing problems", not least on the functioning of the B3174 and the A30 – could Devon County Council lawfully conclude that the development would be acceptable? Answers on a postcard.