AI’s application to extend Chard Junction Quarry in Dorset AONB refused

Yesterday, Dorset Council’s Strategic Planning Committee rejected Aggregate Industries’ planning application WD/D/19/000451 to extend the life of Chard Junction Quarry. The company wanted to extract some 830,000 tonnes of sand and gravel from a new site at Westford Park Farm in the Dorset AONB.

Previous posts on this application can be found here. 

Dorset Council planning officers had recommended that councillors approve the application – despite the proposal's "significant adverse landscape impact on the character of the designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty", and despite the NPPF saying that development within AONBs: 

should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances, and where it can be demonstrated that the development is in the public interest.

A last minute letter from Aggregate Industries was sent directly to members of the committee in response to a damning technical review by an independent quarry design expert commissioned by objectors. Amongst other things, the expert claimed: 

...revised Application Plans incorporates some fundamental design flaws which mean that the scheme as it stands is not capable of being developed into a detailed design that would comply with the provisions of the Quarries Regulations 1999. 

The expert also raised questions over a culvert that had the potential to restrict the flow of a watercourse, "unless carefully designed." This seemed to irk the author of Aggregate Industries' letter, who retorted with "why on earth would we design something uncarefully?" 

But we all know that this is exactly what has happened for multiple parts of the company’s proposal to quarry Straitgate Farm – including, coincidentally, reliance on a small, easily-blocked 3rd party culvert for surface water drainage of a large part of the site. Aggregate Industries does not have a good track record here of relying on assets that do not belong to them. Readers will remember that the company's first application for Straitgate was withdrawn in 2016 after it made the careless error of failing to check it had the necessary rights over 3rd party land. 

For the Chard Junction application, Aggregate Industries’ panicky letter failed to persuade councillors, who were left unconvinced there were exceptional circumstances that would warrant such harm to the AONB – particularly given that around 90% of the extracted material would be for the decorative market. One councillor pointed to the NPPF's newly included reference to the UN’s 17 Global Goals for Sustainable Development, and to the reference that sustainable development means "using natural resources prudently". 

Councillors voted to reject the application by 6 votes to 3. How refreshing to see sense prevail.

Chard Junction Quarry extension rejectedhttps://t.co/Q7MOwyJoEP

— Bridport & Lyme News (@thebridportnews) September 10, 2021

AI’s Chard Junction Quarry extension recommended for approval

Aggregate Industries’ planning application for an extension to Chard Junction Quarry in Dorset submitted in 2019, WD/D/19/000451, has been the subject of a number of posts.

The application to quarry some 830,000 tonnes of sand and gravel at Westford Park Farm over some 7 years will now be determined on 12 July 2021. 

The application has been recommended for approval – despite the significant harm it would cause to the Dorset AONB, as recognised by various statutory consultees. The officer’s report says: 

16.1 it is recognised that notwithstanding mitigation measures, the proposed development will result in harm to the visual amenity and landscape character of the AONB. It is noted that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB. Whilst the notable impacts on visual amenity and landscape character of the area are recognised, it is considered that there are significant sustainability benefits in the retention of a sand and gravel quarry within this location. These benefits, in combination with the uniqueness of the mineral deposit, are considered to represent exceptional circumstances that would be in the public interest. It is considered that any harm to the AONB would be outweighed by these exceptional circumstances and the development being in the public interest. The proposal is therefore seen to be in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the NPPF and Policy DM4 of BDPMS. 

The recommendation is therefore that planning permission be granted "subject to conditions and s106", the Section 106 agreement to include: 

A financial contribution of £7500 per annum over 10 years for the management of the AONB. 

Why has this application been recommended for approval? 

The proposal represents the extension of an existing and established quarry; 
Although this proposal would result in a residual landscape character and visual impact, the proposal would bring sustainability benefits from a reduction in the haulage distance of mineral by HGV’s;
The proposal would have no adverse impact on the ecological, archaeological or hydrological interests of the locality;
There is not considered to be any significant harm to residential amenity; 
There are no material considerations which would warrant refusal of this application.

Various documents have been uploaded to the application site since we last posted, including a letter from Aggregate Industries dated 20 October 2020, from the same person overseeing the Straitgate Farm application. This letter set out the company’s "understanding of the sustainability benefits of maintaining production at Chard Junction", which apparently include "significant mileage benefits, which would avoid increases in CO2 and NOx emissions". The company claimed:

Chard Junction Quarry is the only sand and gravel quarry on the west side of Dorset and is located on the border with Somerset and in close proximity to Devon. It therefore plays a very significant role in supplying sand and gravel into both these counties. 

However, Dorset Council's Minerals Officer disagreed: 

In terms of supply of construction aggregate, it appears that there is a supply available in Mid-Devon, both existing and allocated. There are also sources of crushed rock. There is no obvious reason that a quarry in central or south-eastern Dorset would have to supply Devon with construction aggregate. 

The view of Devon County Council’s Mineral Planning Authority – contained in the officer's report – was: 

8.3 The Chard Junction site will supply some sand and gravel into eastern Devon as it will be closer to places such as Axminster than quarries in Devon operated by Aggregate Industries (e.g Blackhill in the past, Hillhead now). The site will also supply into Somerset. It is therefore of benefit to Devon if its supply can be maintained through an extension as it will help to limit, albeit to a small degree, pressure on our reserves. Having said that, the Devon Minerals Plan provides enough through its allocations to maintain our landbank without counting on Chard Junction extension being approved. It may be that, if Chard Junction closes, then there will be more demand placed on Devon S&G quarries, meaning their reserves are depleted faster than expected. In summary, in principle we support the proposal as it will assist in maintaining a regional supply of material, but if permission were refused, the knock on effect for Devon is likely to be quite small. 

How small? Aggregate Industries claimed:

Total sales in 2019 were 123,041 tonnes of which 114,646 tonnes were exported to Devon and Somerset, by comparison only 1,248 tonnes was supplied to Dorset. 

Small indeed. Would hospitals go unbuilt if permission were refused? Unlikely. Aggregate Industries was pushed into admitting, in a second letter, that: 

approximately 90% of Chard’s output is into the decorative market

And for that "decorative market", Dorset Council now recommends the defacement of the Dorset AONB. It surely is a crazy screwed-up world. 

EDIT 13.7.21 Decision on Chard Junction Quarry extension delayed

AI pushes same old arguments for plan to continue to despoil Dorset AONB

In July, we posted AI's plan to extend Chard quarry would have ‘significant adverse impact on AONB’, how Aggregate Industries' planning application WD/D/19/000451 submitted to Dorset Council to extend Chard Junction Quarry at Westford Park Farm had attracted objections from Dorset AONB Partnership, and also from Dorset Council Landscape Officer who wrote:

I have a concern that a detrimental effect on this part of the AONB is unavoidable with assessment C not being met of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. The proposed quarry extension with its associated haul road is considered to have the potential for a significant adverse landscape impact on the character of the designated Area of Outstanding Natural beauty.

The NPPF is of course very clear about AONBs:

Planning permission should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances…

Aggregate Industries is plainly getting rattled by the responses to this application, and the company’s consultants have now fired off another letter to Dorset Council to re-address the AONB issue – claiming that the Council and the Dorset AONB team have got it all wrong:

...we consider that the Landscape officers’ and AONB Team’s consultation responses do not reflect a balanced assessment of the development.

Well, Aggregate Industries' consultants would say that, wouldn't they?

These consultants – being completely impartial, of course – think they are the ones who can provide a balanced view. As if. Last month – representing the company that couldn't care less about carbon and climate change, if its multi-million mile haulage scheme for Straitgate Farm is anything to go by – they wrote:

Taking a balanced view, it is considered that given the clear and substantive benefits that this scheme can bring to this part of the AONB, the carbon and climate change benefits of retaining a sand and gravel quarry within this location, the associated benefits to the local economy and the acceptable environmental and technical assessments, the proposed extension at Westford Park Farm is in the public interest and the proposal meets the exceptional circumstances as set out in paragraph 172.

However balanced Aggregate Industries' consultants' view might be, they did nothing more than rehash the same tired old arguments, adding nothing new or exceptional to justify why the company's sand and gravel quarry at Chard Junction should continue to blight the Dorset AONB.

In fact, the above paragraph has been wheeled out before, lazily lifted virtually word for word from a previous document in April:

4.1.20 Therefore, it is considered that given the clear and substantive benefits that this scheme can bring to this part of the AONB, the carbon and climate change benefits of retaining a sand and gravel quarry within this location, the associated benefits to the local economy and the acceptable environmental and technical assessments, the proposed extension at Westford Park Farm is in the public interest and the proposal meets the exceptional circumstances tests set out in the NPPF.

We already know that Dorset AONB Partnership has found Aggregate Industries' arguments for exceptional circumstances "uncompelling":

I note that the applicant has submitted information in support of their view that the proposal is able to meet the requirements of an exceptional circumstances test. In my opinion, there are aspects of the arguments presented that are uncompelling.

Furthermore:

The major adverse effect of the operation of the proposed extension on the undeveloped, tranquil and remote character of the site and its context clearly compromise the special qualities of the AONB, placing the application in conflict with a wide range of Management Plan policies, as listed earlier.

These views should hardly come as a surprise to Aggregate Industries. As far back as 2018, a scoping opinion from Dorset Council stated:

The Dorset AONB Team have also provided the following comments “At this early stage I would like to express my strong concern regarding the foreseeable landscape and visual effects of the proposal. The site area possesses a strong and attractive rural character, with an undulating pastoral appearance and mature hedgerows and trees bounding the fields. There are close views into the site area from publicly accessible locations and the area is an integral part of the hillside in views into the AONB from the opposite side of the Axe Valley. Consequently, it is my opinion that the site is highly sensitive to the proposed development and it is difficult to see how foreseeable significant effects could be satisfactorily addressed.”

AI’s plan to extend Chard quarry would have ‘significant adverse impact on AONB’

Last month, we posted about Aggregate Industries' planning application to extend Chard Junction Quarry in the Dorset AONB, highlighting that, even though the company had modified its scheme to quarry 830,000 tonnes of sand and gravel at Westford Park Farm over some 7 years, Natural England still had concerns:

Although the scheme is a substantial improvement on the previous proposals the scheme will nevertheless inevitably result in the loss of fields of a rural character within a natural landform in the Axe Valley Character Area. The final restored fields and associated habitats will make a notable extension to the areas of restored quarries within the general locality resulting in unavoidable detrimental effects on the protected landscape of the Dorset AONB.

This week, Dorset Council Landscape Officer made their views known. It won’t have been the sort of response Aggregate Industries was hoping for:

I have a concern that a detrimental effect on this part of the AONB is unavoidable with assessment C not being met of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. The proposed quarry extension with its associated haul road is considered to have the potential for a significant adverse landscape impact on the character of the designated Area of Outstanding Natural beauty.

Assessment C of the National Planning Policy Framework?

172. Great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. The conservation and enhancement of wildlife and cultural heritage are also important considerations in these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks the Broads. The scale and extent of development within these designated areas should be limited. Planning permission should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances, and where it can be demonstrated that the development is in the public interest. Consideration of such applications should include an assessment of:

a) the need for the development, including in terms of any national considerations, and the impact of permitting it, or refusing it, upon the local economy;

b) the cost of, and scope for, developing outside the designated area, or meeting the need for it in some other way; and

c) any detrimental effect on the environment, the landscape and recreational opportunities, and the extent to which that could be moderated

Aggregate Industries may be forced back to the drawing board again, but can quarrying ever be compatible with an AONB designation?

AI’s planning application to extend Chard Junction Quarry in Dorset AONB

The Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty "is a collection of stunning landscapes and is celebrating the 60th anniversary of its designation as a nationally important protected landscape." Dorset AONB Partnership is tasked with looking after this landscape:

Our mission is to help make sure that our special landscapes are handed to future generations in good shape.

The purpose of any AONB designation is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the designated landscape. Mineral extraction does the reverse. It is therefore a designation that has caused problems for Aggregate Industries.

In the not-so-distant past, the UK subsidiary of Franco-Swiss cement giant LafargeHolcim attempted to extend operations in the East Devon AONB, as part of its planning application to quarry Straitgate Farm. Things didn’t go well. Aggregate Industries couldn’t demonstrate the "exceptional circumstances" needed by the NPPF for major development in an AONB, and the company’s planning application to haul winnings from Straitgate across the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths to be processed on Woodbury Common was eventually pulled. The site at Blackhill – which had suffered from quarrying for decades – is now being restored, apart from one area where industrial development was subsequently permitted. The company now proposes to process Straitgate material at its Uffculme plant instead.

Aggregate Industries will therefore be hoping for a better outcome for its planning application WD/D/19/000451 to extend Chard Junction Quarry at Westford Park Farm, a proposal with "an estimated life of 7 years" to work a now reduced amount of approximately 830,000 tonnes of sand and gravel.

The site straddles a county boundary. Somerset County Council considered it "appropriate for Dorset County Council to determine the application in its entirety" based on a report involving Devon County Council’s Minerals Officer – the same officer who championed the Straitgate Farm site so enthusiastically almost a decade ago now. The world of minerals planning is a small one.

The proposal is next to the River Axe in the Dorset AONB. Aggregate Industries claims it’s the "specialist nature of the mineral from Chard Quarry that makes it impractical to locate the quarry outside the AONB" – namely the mineral’s aesthetics, its "texture, physical properties and golden colour". Furthermore:

Chard Junction Quarry is in a unique logistical position in the marketplace, ideally suited to serve the rural markets in East Devon, South Somerset and West Dorset... The extension at Westford Park Farm would provide a further 5 years provision... 4.1.9

However, NPPF paragraph 172 is clear about "major development" in an AONB:

Planning permission should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances, and where it can be demonstrated that the development is in the public interest.

The initial response from Natural England recommended the application be refused:

Natural England considers that the application is likely to lead to a significant and permanent detrimental effects on the protected landscape of the Dorset AONB.

It's certainly difficult to see how Aggregate Industries' existing workings at Chard Junction have enhanced the natural beauty of the designated AONB landscape.

Dorset AONB Partnership was unconvinced there were "exceptional circumstances" for the proposal:

I note that the applicant has submitted information in support of their view that the proposal is able to meet the requirements of an exceptional circumstances test. In my opinion, there are aspects of the arguments presented that are uncompelling. Concerning the need for the development, it is recognised that the site is not contained within the Council’s Mineral Sites Plan and that there is no anticipated landbank shortfall over the next 7 years or the life of the Plan.

In my opinion, the effects arising from this proposal clearly conflict with the statutory purpose of the AONB designation. I am not satisfied that the proposed mitigation measures, including measures such as phased extraction and tree planting, would satisfactorily address the major impact that the development would have on the character and appearance of the AONB during the operational phase. The major adverse effect of the operation of the proposed extension on the undeveloped, tranquil and remote character of the site and its context clearly compromise the special qualities of the AONB, placing the application in conflict with a wide range of Management Plan policies, as listed earlier. Furthermore, the major adverse effects on views within and into the AONB clearly diminish the natural beauty of a sizable portion of land within the designated area.

Since then, Aggregate Industries has made modifications, including "improved restoration contours", the use of a silt press to allow earlier restoration of silt lagoons, and £250,000 of "restoration benefits" over 30 years. Natural England remains unconvinced:

Taking account of the proposed modifications Natural England advises that the proposed extension should still be considered as a "major" development in the context of National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 172 and so your authority will need to be satisfied the proposals can meet the policy’s "exceptional circumstances" tests.

Although the scheme is a substantial improvement on the previous proposals the scheme will nevertheless inevitably result in the loss of fields of a rural character within a natural landform in the Axe Valley Character Area. The final restored fields and associated habitats will make a notable extension to the areas of restored quarries within the general locality resulting in unavoidable detrimental effects on the protected landscape of the Dorset AONB.

That was earlier this month. Who knows what will happen next? Quarrying started at Chard Junction in the 1940s. Without this extension the company says the site will close. Back in December 2018:

At current extraction rates of circa 200,000 tonnes per annum there is approximately 12 months permitted reserves remaining. The urgent need for an extension is clear.

So, in theory, given it's now 2020, Aggregate Industries should have already depleted its permitted reserves, and given that the application is still to be determined and, according to the Planning Statement, "the proposed working scheme requires a number of actions prior to the commencement of mineral extraction" – haul road, screening bunds etc – to be "carried out over two quarters in Year 1", unless the company has a cunning plan, or mountains of stockpiled minerals, there may not be any mineral to sell for some time. Perhaps disappointing sales in 2020 have allowed the company to eke out supplies; the trend in recent years has been clear:

In 2015 sales from Chard Junction Quarry were 196,000 tonnes, in 2016 sales of 192,000 tonnes and in 2017 sales of 186,000 tonnes. 5.2.7

Aggregate Industries claims:

The proposed extension area is the last phase of workable resource and there are no viable alternative extension areas that have not already been worked. The proposed extension area will utilise the existing site infrastructure and processing facilities. 5.3

The 'do nothing option' is not a practical option for Aggregate Industries. Closing the site and leaving workable reserves in situ will effectively sterilise them. Given the size of the proposed extension area it would not be economically viable to close and reopen the site at some point in the future as an independent operation. Maintaining production sustains current employment for the next few years. 5.4

And yet it is apparently economically viable to open a new greenfield site at Straitgate to quarry a similar amount of material?

The do nothing option might not be "a practical option for Aggregate Industries" at Chard – although the extension would only buy 5 years' worth of material before the problem rears its head again. But clearly the market would cope. The company admits that "In theory, the quarry’s current aggregate supply could be absorbed by competitors", but its Non Technical Summary is at pains to point out:

If Chard Junction Quarry was closed, there would be a considerable increase in transport costs and extra road miles to meet local markets in the west of the County and beyond in Somerset and Devon.

And it is here we get to the nub of Aggregate Industries’ argument that it should be allowed to continue to despoil an AONB:

In terms of the AONB... there are no suitable alternative sites which are capable of supplying the existing markets at Chard Junction Quarry without significant increases in transportation costs which would increase carbon emissions. 10.6.8

You see, Aggregate Industries is happy to use green arguments when it suits. The company points to the carbon benefits of continued working in the AONB:

The reduction of carbon emissions and minimising transportation distances is an important consideration supporting the proposal. 4.1.10

But let’s put Aggregate Industries' sudden concern for the climate into context. The application proposes that "a designated haul road will be used to transport sand and gravel back to the existing Chard Junction Quarry for processing." The length of this haul road is around 600m.

The length of the haul road Aggregate Industries has proposed for its Straitgate Farm application – that Devon County Council with its declared Climate Emergency will need to decide upon – is 23 miles to the processing plant, 46 miles for each round trip, 2.5 million miles in all.

Staggering then – given this climate-busting 2.5 million mile proposal – that Aggregate Industries has the gall to remind Dorset Council about its declared Climate Emergency:

In terms of a reduction of carbon emissions and minimising transportation distances, at its very first Full Council meeting in May 2019, the Council took the step to declare a Climate Emergency. This means the Council are: • taking direct action to reduce the negative environmental impact of Council services; • using Council services to support and influence Dorset communities and organisations to reduce their carbon footprint; and • working with partners to develop the Council's climate emergency plan. 4.1.11

Think about the 2.5 million mile proposal for Straitgate, when Aggregate Industries reminds us that "the planning process will be critical in ensuring that the aggregates …are sourced and transported in ways that minimise emissions of greenhouse gases":

In order to be able to look for savings in the carbon footprint associated with aggregate minerals, the planning process will be critical in ensuring that the aggregates required to meet this demand are sourced and transported in ways that minimise emissions of greenhouse gases. This planning application provides the Council with some scope to reduce the carbon footprint associated with the supply of primary aggregates in Dorset and will ensure that the demand from local markets and beyond in Somerset and Devon are sourced and transported in ways that minimise emissions of greenhouse gases. In view of national policy and the Council's Climate Emergency aims, the reduction in carbon emissions and minimising transportation distances is an important consideration. 4.1.13

Therefore, it is considered that given the clear and substantive benefits that this scheme can bring to this part of the AONB, the carbon and climate change benefits of retaining a sand and gravel quarry within this location, the associated benefits to the local economy and the acceptable environmental and technical assessments, the proposed extension at Westford Park Farm is in the public interest and the proposal meets the exceptional circumstances tests set out in the NPPF. 4.1.20

But it’s not just concerns about the AONB. Aggregate Industries’ planning application for Chard Junction may have attracted less objections than for Straitgate, but concerns have nevertheless been raised on the impact of dust, noise, visual impact, and the effect on groundwater.

The impact on groundwater has been an overriding concern for Aggregate Industries' plans for Straitgate too. Just last month, Prof Brassington warned Devon County Council that a quarry at Straitgate would ‘irreversibly damage’ water sources.

In contrast to the numerous supplies dependent on Straitgate, however, at Chard Junction just one private water supply is thought to be at risk. Aggregate Industries’ consultants argue the effects on the private water supply at Westford Park Farm Well would be "Minor – Not Significant", but recognise:

The Westford Park Farm Well is, however, sensitive to changes in groundwater level, and it is recommended that ... an alternative water supply is provided in the unlikely event of derogation of the private water supply resulting from mineral development. 7.1.8

Last week, the Environment Agency – not the person overseeing Straitgate – took a different view:

The report concludes that the risk to Westford Park Farm Well is 'minor - not significant'. However, we view the risk to this well as being significant because it is only 10m from the boundary of the extraction area and because the river terrace gravels aquifer from which it abstracts is very limited in extent.

The report supports a Section 106 agreement being put in place requiring that an alternative water supply is provided if the Westford Park Farm Well is derogated as a result of the mineral development. We recommend that any Section 106 agreement provides for an alternative supply in the event that either the quantity or quality of water abstracted from the well are impacted... If the Westford Park Farm Well is impacted by the development then any replacement water supply will need to operate in perpetuity. This should be borne in mind when drafting the Section 106 agreement.

Indeed. In perpetuity. It would need to be the same for the long list of private water users around Straitgate, including farms, businesses and Grade I Cadhay with its mediaeval fishponds.

Incidentally, isn't it funny how many people disagree with the conclusions of the not-so-independent hydrogeologists batting enthusiastically for Aggregate Industries? It won’t surprise anyone to learn that the consultants who assessed the hydrogeology at Chard Junction – "Wood Environmental & Infrastructure Solutions UK Ltd", the ones who concluded 'minor - not significant' for the impact on a supply 10m from the quarry edge – were the very same ones whose "conceptual model of the groundwater environment" at Straitgate Farm has been so comprehensively rubbished.

It will be interesting – in a minerals way – to see how the Chard application proceeds. We will post again should anything noteworthy happen.

CEMEX quarry plan in Suffolk – underlines AI’s reckless stance to water at Straitgate

Concerned residents in Suffolk have directed us towards a planning application submitted last month by CEMEX to quarry Lime Kiln Farm, an extension of Wangford Quarry. The site has been proposed by Suffolk County Council as a Preferred Area for gravel extraction in its draft Minerals Local Plan, despite being in the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB – where "planning permission should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances" NPPF 172.

Readers will remember Aggregate Industries’ attempts not so long ago to win consent in the East Devon AONB – to process material from Straitgate at their existing plant adjacent to the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths. Approval would have meant a continued blight on Woodbury Common, and would have introduced nitrate-rich agricultural soils into an area sensitive to any nutrient change. After concern from Natural England, AI withdrew its application and has now relocated the plant.

But we’ve digressed. The reason for this post was to contrast the difference between CEMEX and AI in relation to protecting nearby groundwater supplies.

CEMEX has submitted a range of documents in support of its application to extend Wangford Quarry and to quarry up to 1 million tonnes of gravel over some 11 years. The small number of documents submitted by CEMEX contrasts with the huge jumble of fragmented reports AI has been forced to submit in its multi-year quest to win consent to quarry Straitgate Farm – a clear indication of the number of constraints the company faces here in East Devon.

One of the CEMEX documents is a Hydrogeological Assessment – again, a brief affair compared with the tomes supplied by AI’s consultants Amec Foster Wheeler for Straitgate. Interestingly, CEMEX’s consultants rely on "(Brassington, 2007)" – a reference to academic literature by Professor Brassington, a leading authority on groundwater, who recently wrote a damning report concluding that 'ANY quarrying at Straitgate would cause problems'. For the Wangford extension, the salient features are a public water supply 280m away, no private water supplies located within 2km, and a proportion of the site within an Environment Agency Source Protection Zone 2. Groundwater levels have been monitored close to the proposed site since 2002 and show a typical range of 0.6 to 1.4mAOD. In contrast, at Straitgate, which also has a SPZ2 designated across part of the site, groundwater levels have been monitored since 2013 and fluctuate in some areas by no more than 24cm and other areas by as much as 6m.

CEMEX’s report is in stark contrast to the risks AI is prepared to take with the "fragile groundwater system" at Straitgate. The conclusions from CEMEX's consultants, JBA Consulting:

Quarrying involves activities that have the potential to affect the hydrogeological environment of the area. These activities have been identified and an assessment of their potential effects made.

The operational phase potentially poses the greatest risk to the groundwater regime because it will involve constant earthworks and frequent vehicle movements. There will also be minimal vegetation and no soil within the excavation area.

The main potential impacts to the hydrogeological environment are: alteration of recharge pattern, reduction in groundwater quality and increased groundwater vulnerability.

Proposed mitigation measures include the use of a Pollution Prevention Plan and the limitation of all workings to at least 1m above the highest water table.

Yes, that’s right. For this very level Suffolk site, where the maximum groundwater level is relatively easy to model, CEMEX still proposes that working will be limited to "at least 1m above the highest water table". CEMEX's Non-Technical Summary reiterates:

Historically quarrying has always left 1 metre of undisturbed sand and gravel between the bottom of the quarry and the surface of the groundwater. It is proposed to continue to do this when quarrying Lime Kiln Farm. This will, however, reduce the depth of dry, or unsaturated, sand and gravel that lies above the groundwater. In turn, this means that it is easier for potentially polluting liquids, such as fuels and lubricants, to reach and pollute the groundwater if they are spilt. 2.7.4

In contrast, at Straitgate, AI is proposing to leave a 0m unquarried buffer above the maximum water table; a maximum water table the exact position of which is still unknown, and where – as AFW admitted before whitewashing its reports – "there is the possibility for steps in the water table related to faulting" and "there is also likely to be other unmapped local faulting".

The aquifer underlying Straitgate supplies water to more than 100 people, to livestock farms, wetland habitats in ancient woodland, mediaeval fishponds, and a Grade I manor house. Dr Rutter is "concerned that there is a very steep hydraulic gradient across the site... Variations in the shape of the water table cannot be contoured based on the number of piezometers used". Prof Brassington says "an unquarried buffer of at least 3 m [should be] left above the maximum water table to minimise the negative impacts".

If AI doesn't propose to leave an unquarried buffer above the maximum water table to safeguard water supplies – a buffer typically employed by CEMEX, Hanson and others, as we posted in Quarry companies struggle to dig in the right direction, let alone to the nearest cm – what does it propose? AI's cunning plan is to rely on groundwater levels falling by at least 1m over the summer months – and clearly in some areas they don’t – before digging down to the maximum water table, and backfilling with overburden before groundwater levels rebound in the winter. Prof Brassington says it’s "untried anywhere else in the country" and "too difficult for typical machine operators". We’ve posted on the scheme before in No wonder AI wants to keep Straitgate’s groundwater data secret, Seasonal working scheme for Straitgate can't work as AI describes and AI was asked a very simple question.

If that doesn’t ring warning bells, consider that the authors of this "revolutionary" scheme – at AI and consultants AFW – are both no longer with their respective companies.

What if this experiment screws up drinking water supplies and mediaeval fishponds? Who would sort out the mess, given AI’s legal assurances for alternative water supplies are “unfit for purpose”? Let’s hope the EA and DCC have some good answers. They could never say they weren’t warned.

EDDC approves CDE's planning application for industrial units in East Devon AONB

Last month, we posted CDE’s planning application for Blackhill Quarry recommended for approval, and this week, Conservative Councillors at East Devon District Council duly approved the controversial planning application from Clinton Devon Estates for 35,000 sq ft of industrial units at Blackhill Quarry on Woodbury Common – in an area that was meant to be restored back to heathland.

Details on the EDDC Planning Committee meeting can be found at East Devon Watch. Tony Bennett chair of "Wild Woodbury" responded:

There was a fantastic turnout for the meeting and I think it is fair to say everyone left feeling let down, angry, and betrayed. The floodgates are now open.

CDE’s planning application for Blackhill Quarry recommended for approval

Clinton Devon Estates' controversial planning application for 35,000 sq ft of industrial floor space at Blackhill Quarry in the East Devon AONB – in an area that was meant to be restored back to heathland – has been recommended by East Devon District Council officers for approval.

We have previously posted on the subject: Why does quarrying have such a bad name? Take a look at Blackhill and Objections mount for CDE’s planning application for Blackhill Quarry.

For those concerned at this continued industrialisation of Woodbury Common, the application will be determined on 4 September 2018 at 10am at EDDC Council Offices in Sidmouth.

EDDC planners reckon, in the officer’s report, that:

The existing quarry site is served by a dedicated access from the B3180 that allows vehicles to enter and leave via different carriageways that are adjacent to each other, this arrangement would continue for the proposal. When it was operating the aggregate industries trip generation produced around 320 heavy goods vehicle movements per day (160 inbound and 160 outbound) together with vehicle movements for Blackhill Engineering, the proposals would produce around 134 vehicle movements (117 inbound and 117 outbound), being a mixture of cars and heavy goods vehicles, thus resulting in a reduced number of vehicle movements to and from the site. On this basis the proposal would accord with Policy TC7 of the EDDC Local Plan and the guidance contained in Paragraph 109 of the revised NPPF as the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would not be severe.

But whether it's an indication of the care EDDC has taken in assessing this application, or whether the figures presented by CDE have caused confusion, readers will see that "(117 inbound and 117 outbound)" does not equate to "134 vehicle movements".

More importantly, however, the proposal would represent major development in an AONB. On this, the new NPPF is clear:

172. Great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues… Planning permission should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances, and where it can be demonstrated that the development is in the public interest.

EDDC obviously doesn’t care about great weight, or have any idea what exceptional means. It says:

It is considered that an exceptional circumstances case can be made given the economic benefits from the expansion of the business on the local economy and through the support that the business will be able to give to the construction of one of the country’s largest construction sites at Hinkley Point C. In addition, there are not considered to be any wider effects on the environment, particularly given the mitigation proposed, and officers are satisfied that there are no alternative site or viable ways of providing an expansion to the business outside of the AONB.

However, it defies belief that there are no alternative commercial facilities nearby, with the city of Exeter, for example, on Blackhill Engineering’s doorstep.

It goes without saying that this sort of thing is obviously the motivation for Aggregate Industries at Straitgate Farm too. It can’t be interested in the inconsequential amount of sand and gravel on offer (23 miles away from its processing plant) or on restoring the defiled site back to farmland. Flogging off the site afterwards for industrial development, on the other hand, makes far more sense.

Devon landscapes at threat from NPPF changes, warns CPRE

An article from DevonLive:

CPRE Devon is urging people to take immediate action to object to the wording of a lengthy consultation document – the National Planning Policy Framework - which sets out the Government’s policies on proposed developments and how they are applied.

The campaigning organisation says the proposed new wording of the NPPF is vague and ambiguous and leaves National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty across the South West without the high level of protection they currently have from developers.

Paragraph 115 of the existing NPPF says: “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.”

But these key words are omitted in the proposed version. The new Paragraph 170 says only: “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.”

The consultation is open until this Thursday, May 10. Comments and objections can be made online or by email to: planningpolicyconsultation@communities.gsi.gov.uk

Objections mount for CDE’s planning application for Blackhill Quarry

Aggregate Industries’ permission to process material at Blackhill Quarry on Woodbury Common came to an end in 2016, and the plant is now in the process of being taken down to be re-erected at Hillhead Quarry near Uffculme.

It was widely hoped that this area at Blackhill would be restored, but landowner Clinton Devon Estates made an outline planning application late last year for 35,000 sq ft of industrial units - referred to in the post Why does quarrying have such a bad name? Take a look at Blackhill

Objections to this application in the East Devon AONB are mounting up, and the issue has been covered in the local press:

Woodbury business park expansion would be ‘morally and ecologically wrong’

Plans for Blackhill Engineering expansion submitted

DCC raised no objection to the proposal, but interestingly the Devon Stone Federation did:

This planning application has been drawn to my attention by the Minerals Officer of Devon County Council… Devon Stone Federation objects on the basis that the proposal would sterilise an important underlying mineral.

Sterilisation is a rather bizarre reason - given that the mineral operator is now moving away from the site and dismantling its plant, and given that modification orders to restrict further mineral extraction were served back in 1999 when the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths were designated nature conservation areas of European importance.

But hey, an objection is an objection and should be welcomed, particularly considering what had been intended for this area.

The plan agreed with DCC states that for the processing area, Area 12:

It is anticipated that an alternative use for Area 12 will be sought by the landowner, perhaps a recreational or leisure use which will benefit from the existing hardstanding, office building and workshop to alleviate pressure on the SSSI. It is acknowledged that a planning permission for an alternative use will need to be sought from the Local Planning Authority. Should planning permission not be forthcoming then the office building and workshop will be demolished and removed from site. In addition, the existing hardstanding would be dug up and recycled for potential use on estate roads. The area will then be restored in line with the site restoration principals as agreed by the Quarry Restoration Group at the time. 


Only a select few - landowners, mineral companies, county councils or the like - would have imagined that plans for "a recreational or leisure use… to alleviate pressure on the SSSI" could mean an industrial estate. Objections to planning application 17/3022/MOUT can still be made here.

Greystone Quarry

Aggregate Industries couldn’t believe its luck, no doubt, when its planning application for a 10 million tonne quarry extension within the Tamar Valley AONB was approved by Cornwall Council in September. The application PA16/10746 had been validated the previous November. The approval extends the life of Greystone Quarry near Launceston to 2066 and requires the stopping up of a public highway.

A number of objections to the application had been received, including from the Tamar Valley AONB Management Team and from DCC. Natural England said:

The submitted documents may serve to underplay the impacts on the AONB. We therefore advise that you give full weight to the detailed comments that have been submitted by the Tamar Valley AONB Partnership.

The AONB straddles Cornwall and Devon. DCC reminded CC that:

Cornwall Council will be aware that there is a presumption against major development in AONBs unless “exceptional circumstances and...public interest” can be proven that would outweigh the adverse effects on the landscape and scenic qualities of the AONB.

Cornwall Council reckoned there were exceptional circumstances for the extension:

In summary, the development is considered to satisfactorily address the need to ensure that the development is in the public interest which therefore addresses the exceptional circumstances within the NPPF. 73

Read the Officer’s report recommending approval and decide for yourself - para 58 onwards - whether exceptional circumstances were demonstrated. According to the NPPF:

116. Planning permission should be refused for major developments in these designated areas except in exceptional circumstances and where it can be demonstrated they are in the public interest.

Being in the public interest does not in itself satisfy "exceptional circumstances"; there’s an "and" in 116 which, fortunately for AI, CC appears to have disregarded.

But AI must have been worried - especially after receiving a backlash over extending the life of Blackhill Quarry in the East Devon AONB. There was obviously a push to get anybody and everybody linked to the quarry to send letters of support; here’s just a handful - see if you can spot any similarities.

Objectors had voiced their concerns at the planning meeting:

“The opposers to the application far outweigh the supporters. It’s loss of a medieval landscape.” Adding that residents’ water quality ‘could be severely compromised’ if plans went ahead, he said the application ‘would be a crime against the environment’.

Those concerns, including the ones from DCC, fell on deaf ears - with 9 votes in favour and 4 against.

As an aside, Greystone Quarry has been referred to in AI’s application for Straitgate Farm:

... if high polished stone value (PSV) mineral is not extracted from Straitgate Farm then it will need to be imported from elsewhere.

The alternative supply of high PSV aggregate for the Westleigh and Rockbeare asphalt plants would come from the applicant’s operation at Greystone Quarry in Launceston, Cornwall. Greystone Quarry is 70 miles from the Westleigh Quarry asphalt plant and 55.6 miles from the asphalt plant at Rockbeare.

That’s the same Rockbeare asphalt plant that’s been operating without permission since 2014, but as we said in our response to Straitgate's Reg22, this alternative supply:

obviously ignores the 4 million tonnes of permitted BSPB reserves and stockpiled pebbles already at Houndaller [and] in any case, the majority of the Straitgate resource would not end up in the high PSV market. This market is relatively small. Any increased “comparative importation distances” for this product would be dwarfed by the haulage plan to get Straitgate material to Hillhead.

Anyway, whilst AI popped the champagne corks at Greystone, the company must have surely wondered why on earth it hasn't yet won permission to quarry Straitgate Farm - a farm that is not within an AONB - a planning application that was first submitted back in 2015.

It can’t be for a lack of help from DCC. The Minerals Officer has been championing the site since before 2012, discarding a number of other sites for the Minerals Plan that even the Environment Agency highlighted had less constraints. In fact, it’s interesting to read DCC’s objection to Greystone:

… once restored, the proposal would permanently modify the distinctive natural topography of the valley slopes and remove long established fields, hedgerows, trees and a rural lane that make a positive contribution to the scenic quality of views from Devon. During operations, there would also be significant adverse visual and noise impacts of quarrying activity and movement of heavy plant, potentially using using reversing beepers, in between each stage, to create the associated spoil heaps and artificial bunds. Such impacts would clearly not conserve and enhance the quality of the scenery nor the rural tranquillity experienced within the valley.

It is not agreed that the proposed large quarry void, waterbody, bunds and planting would be an improvement on the existing landscape of fields, hedges and rural lanes, the pattern of which is distinctive and positively contributing to the scenery of the area.

You have to wonder why these comments by DCC aren't equally applicable to Straitgate Farm - a farm overlooked by an AONB.

And the impact on the AONB - if all these trees were removed?

This is the view from Little Straitgate; the East Devon AONB can be glimpsed in the background.

Aggregate Industries' site access plans cut through the middle of the trees shown in the photo. It is likely that the majority of trees seen here would be felled, including those three tall oaks. AI calls these trees F, G and H; Tree H belongs to a third party who objects to the proposal:

The “no dig” construction means that the works will potentially interfere with the root protection areas of Trees F, G and H and some of G15A as illustrated by Drawing R22/L/3-3-005 and it is likely they will be damaged by the development and need to be felled. 4.1

Whilst AI’s plans would afford beautiful unobstructed views towards the East Hill strips, they would also afford less welcome unobstructed views into Straitgate - and the 5m high storage mounds detailed on the plans below - from the AONB.

The visual impact of these trees coming down on views from the AONB has not been assessed.

EDDC’s landscape response recommends refusal

EDDC’s Landscape Architect has recommended that Aggregate Industries’ planning application to quarry Straitgate Farm be refused.

...the site helps to shape the setting of the East Devon AONB... the development would permanently alter the landform of a locally distinctive ridge... the proposals for how the site will be worked offer little mitigation for impacts on the long distance views from East Hill.

EDDC also points out that "topsoil should not be stored in mounds greater than 2m otherwise the chemical composition of the soil will alter". AI wants to store top soil in mounds 3m high; although, even at this height, the company has not allowed enough land to do this, as back-of-the-envelope calculations for our submission show.

EDDC concludes:

Currently the submitted LVIA as part of the Environmental Statement does not sufficiently address... How the site helps to create the setting of the East Devon AONB [etc]... it is recommended that planning permission is refused.

DCC approves scheme to haul sand & gravel 74,000 miles to be processed in AONB

In terms of minerals applications, you could hardly come across a more ludicrous, unsustainable proposition with Aggregate Industries' Houndaller / Blackhill planning application - hauling 1400 loads of as-dug sand and gravel 26 miles to be processed in an AONB; 74,000 HGV miles in total.

How Planning Officers came to recommend this application - can be found here.

How six Conservative Councillors on the DMC came to approve this application (three Councillors voted against, four Councillors abstained) - can be found here.

Cllr Christine Channon was one who spoke passionately against it, and asked the the Committee "Are you really convinced that there are exceptional circumstances" to allow major development in an AONB?

Of course, there are no exceptional circumstances, but curiously, despite government guidance to the contrary, the officer’s report questions whether 40,000 tonnes is indeed major development:

Although Government guidance categorises all mineral development as “major”, it is questionable whether the temporary continuation of the status quo is truly a major development in terms of its impact.

Let’s remind ourselves that there are just 5 months left before processing is due to cease at Blackhill on Woodbury Common; operations should be scaling down. Let’s also remind ourselves exactly how many times DCC has now permitted extensions to operations at the plant, since modification orders were served in 1999 to restrict workings at Blackhill and millions were paid to AI in compensation:

2002 Permission granted to quarry Thorn Tree Plantation at Blackhill

2008 Permission granted to process Marshbroadmoor material at Blackhill

2011 Permission granted to process Venn Ottery material at Blackhill

2016 Permission granted to process Hillhead material at Blackhill

So, 17 years on, with DCC’s track record, when exactly will operations at Blackhill cease? When will the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths be restored for the benefit of nature and people? When will DCC finally make a stand against a multinational cement conglomerate?