Aggregate Industries had extra 460k tonnes of sand & gravel up its sleeve all along

At the Public Inquiry in October 2022, Aggregate Industries pointed to the less-than-7-year landbank for sand and gravel in Devon, and claimed there was therefore an "urgent" need for a quarry at Straitgate Farm. As a result, in weighing up the planning balance, the Planning Inspectors concluded there were: 

154. ... significant material considerations which weigh in favour of the proposal. These include its contribution to sand and gravel supply in Devon in circumstances where there is not currently a 7-year landbank as required by the Framework. 

Ten months before, in December 2021, at the time Aggregate Industries’ application to quarry the farm was refused by Devon County Council, the landbank was actually above 7 years, according to a subsequent revision by the Council. However, by the time of the Public Inquiry, the landbank had indeed dropped to 6.4 years, based on permitted reserves of sand and gravel in the County at the end of 2021 of 3.317 million tonnes, divided by the 10-year sales average of 0.514 million tonnes per annum. 

But, surprise, surprise. It now turns out that, at the time of the appeal, and unbeknown to the Planning Inspectors, Aggregate Industries had another 460,000 tonnes of sand and gravel up its sleeve, which, once permitted, would have pushed the landbank to over 7 years. 

Aggregate Industries has recently lodged a planning application with Devon County Council for Hillhead Quarry near Uffculme – DCC/4399/2024 "Variation of conditions 2, 4, 6, 7, 12, 19, 22 and 25 of ROMP permission DCC/3655/2014... to vary the phasing; landform; drainage; and restoration of the site." 

This application is concerned with modifications to the Houndaller part of the site – a site with the same sort of material that underlies Straitgate Farm – that has suffered from ponding problems, as we have posted about here, here and here.

The Planning Statement for the application reads: 

3.4.1 Houndaller Extension Area is currently facing surface water ponding issues in Phase 6 which is preventing completion of restoration of this section of the quarry. It is considered that a similar situation will occur once extraction operations cease in Phase 7. During 2023 and to date in 2024, in excess of 1m dept [sic] of water has collected over much of the Phase 6 area. The consented final restoration landform does not allow for effective drainage. Therefore, Aggregate Industries are proposing a long-term solution for surface water ponding issues on site. 

Clearly, the concern must be that if the company hasn’t been able to adequately manage surface water at Houndaller, it doesn’t stand much chance of complying with the no water bodies condition at Straitgate: 

25. No water body shall be created within the site other than the approved weigh bridge lagoon.   

However, the company’s application for Houndaller is not just concerned with surface water management. The application’s Non-Technical Summary says: 

1.1.6 The proposed modifications to mineral operations at Houndaller include removal of two unsafe historic faces which will provide an estimated 460,000 tonnes of permitted reserves to Devon’s sand and gravel landbank. 

1.4.10 In addition, at present the approved plans under the extant consent contradict each other, with the approved restoration plan (ref. 2285/ROMP/4C) not showing the ridge along the northern boundary of phase 8, but it is in-situ on the working plans (ref. 2285/ROMP/3C & 2285/ROMP/73D) thereby creating an anomaly. Therefore, at present the approved restoration scheme cannot be delivered as currently consented. 

A spare 460k tonnes? Unsafe quarry faces? Approved plans that contradict each other? How has Aggregate Industries allowed all this to happen? 

But could it be that these perilous quarry faces were not known about at the time of the 2022 appeal? Not unless Aggregate Industries has been asleep for 20 years. The application’s Planning Statement points to The Quarries Regulations of 1999 and says: 

3.2.6 It is proposed to remove the ridge escarpment which lies adjacent to the eastern edge of Houndaller Plantation Pond which is in the northern part of Houndaller Extension Area and former Phase 1 area. 

3.2.7 The former Houndaller Phase 1 extraction area, north of the current Phase 8, had been worked pre-Quarry Regulations 1999 when long-term geotechnical stability of the final quarry faces when excavating sand and gravel material was not given the consideration which is now required for quarry legislative purposes. Whilst this area is now restored, the historical faces are currently up to 20m high and 65˚ to near-vertical therefore presenting both a stability, and health and safety issue. 

3.2.8 Hillhead Quarry is now subject to a Regulation 33 geotechnical assessment every two years. Within this assessment, there are various design criteria that the quarry must use to ensure geotechnical stability for both active and inactive faces. These design criteria’s are derived from the specific geotechnical properties of the geology onsite and from various stability analyses undertaken alongside the assessment. 

3.2.9 Based on the current design criteria for restoration slopes, the historic faces adjacent to the eastern edge of Houndaller Plantation Pond and along the northern boundary of the current approved Phase 8 extraction area have been assessed and are considered to be excessively steep and too high for long- term stability. They therefore currently present a significant geo-technical risk, and health and safety hazard. The current Regulation 33 Geotechnical Assessment for the site states that "Aggregate Industries must develop a plan to include remedial actions on these historic quarry faces". Further detail on the stability issues are presented within the Stability Assessment accompanying this planning application at Appendix 6.2.

The company would therefore have known for years that these hazardous quarry faces did not comply with the 1999 regulations, and that removing them would likely yield extra material. 

But perhaps it forgot all about them at the time of the Straitgate appeal in October 2022? This isn’t likely either. The Stability Assessment referenced in Appendix 6.2 says: 

1.3 ...It was identified in 2022 that the restoration plan needed to be updated to include improved drainage and to update the final profiles in relation to the materials available for backfilling the extraction area. At this point it was a natural way to deal with this legacy face to ensure the whole Houndaller excavation area is left in an adequate way that it supports long term stability and no hazards remain when Aggregate Industries complete this area.

So, how very clever of Aggregate Industries to keep all this material – about half the quantity available at Straitgate – up its sleeve. 

Prior to the determination of its Straitgate Farm application, Aggregate Industries had been in the habit of losing material – including at Houndaller – which had the inevitable effect of reducing the landbank and creating the impression of need for Straitgate. Miraculously, after Straitgate is determined, we now discover the company has found material again. How convenient. How cunning. 

What does this application for Hillhead mean for the County’s sand and gravel supplies: 

3.2.16 The current estimate completion date for extraction [at Houndaller] is end of 2029 with completion of restoration and landscaping by 2031, this is based on an average production rate of 350,000 tonnes per annum. 

Assuming production for the years 2024,25,26,27,28,29 this implies that some 2.1 million tonnes remain, or 1.64 million tonnes excluding the newly found 460,000 tonnes. Aggregate Industries helpfully confirmed in 2019: 

The company's reserves schedule for Houndaller was subsequently revised to 2.9 million tonnes as at 1st January 2019.

Subtracting those two figures implies that over the 5 years 2019,20,21,22,23, some 1.26 million tonnes of sand and gravel has been produced, at a rate of 250,000 tonnes per annum. 

At this rate, Houndaller would in fact last another 8 years. 

Of course, this is why Aggregate Industries – knowing all along it had extra material at Hillhead – has been in no rush to advance its plans for Penslade, despite starting groundwater monitoring in 2021. 

Penslade is owned by Aggregate Industries, and again has the same type of material that underlies Straitgate. Whilst Aggregate Industries claims there is 1.06 million tonnes of saleable aggregate at Straitgate, Penslade is a 23 million tonne sand and gravel resource, 8 million of which is allocated in the Devon Minerals Plan. It sits next to the company's processing plant, not – like Straitgate – 23 miles away. At the appeal, the Council’s Mineral Planning Authority said: 

5.1.13 The Appellant has stated at meetings of the local liaison group for Hillhead Quarry that it is preparing a planning application for their West of Penslade Cross site (to the east of Hillhead Quarry), having undertaken investigative boreholes and intending to seek pre-application advice from the Council before the end of 2022, with a view to submission of an application in 2023. It is also understood that remaining reserves at Hillhead Quarry are sufficient to maintain supply until a new quarry at Penslade has been approved and is capable of being implemented. 

However, to date, no planning application for Penslade has arrived. All Aggregate Industries would say at the appeal was: 

8.4 Aside from the appeal site, the only other allocated site is West Penslade. West Penslade is also AI controlled which [sic] and would be an extension for the Hillhead quarry (planning permission ends in 2028). West Penslade will not come online until then. 

The bottom line is that Straitgate is not quite so urgent after all. 

Furthermore, as we posted last month, Aggregate Industries now says that if current market conditions persist then Straitgate will have to be "mothballed". Local people will wonder what strategic thinking goes on at Aggregate Industries, if any. 

What else does DCC/4399/2024 tell us? In relation to groundwater and nearby water users: 

5.7.3 Throughout the lifetime of the development, some 2 m thickness of unsaturated material will be retained beneath the quarry floor at the western margin of the Houndaller Extension. 

Compare and contrast that with extraction all the way down to the maximum water table at Straitgate, a site with more than 10 times the number of nearby private water supplies at risk than at Houndaller. Even so, Aggregate Industries again recognises that private supplies will be put at risk:

5.7.14 In the unlikely event that a supply is shown to have been impacted by quarry-related drawdown, the following approach is proposed to provide mitigation… The fallback position would be the provision of mains water. AIUK would cover the costs for mains water connection and usage at any property where the water supply is affected by the quarry development. 

What ecological damage will be done in removing those treacherous quarry faces? 

3.5.3 As part of the remedial works for the two unstable ridges within the northern extent of Houndaller, approximately 28,863m2 of lowland mixed deciduous woodland is required to be removed.

 

Which rather undoes this PR piece pushed out by Aggregate Industries last year, congratulating itself for planting saplings at Hillhead. 

Devon County Council is accepting comments on DCC/4399/2024 until 29/06/2024.

Aggregate Industries’ pushback on planning conditions has already started

Aggregate Industries claims: 

In all areas of our business, including internal and external interactions, we always act with integrity. 

Why is integrity important? Aggregate Industries tells us: 

High performance with high integrity is key to sustainable success. 

It may only be corporate BS, but doesn’t it sound good? Well done to the company’s PR gurus. 

If, however, Aggregate Industries does act with integrity, if Aggregate Industries does have strong moral and ethical principles, if Aggregate Industries is virtuous, honourable, trustworthy, it would of course want to abide by planning conditions. It would not want to find weasel words to get around them. It would recognise that planning conditions are there for a reason. They are not there to be interpreted in a way that is favourable to the bottom line of a multinational cement conglomerate. They are there to protect people and the surrounding environment. They are there to "enable development to proceed where it would otherwise have been necessary to refuse planning permission."

But, surprise, surprise, what do we find? Aggregate Industries is already pushing back on the conditions imposed for its permission to quarry Straitgate Farm, pushing back on environmental protection. 

Take the two majestic oak trees, trees F and G, which sit either side of the approved site entrance, but outside of any mineral working area. In its planning application, Aggregate Industries admitted: 

the works will potentially interfere with the root protection areas of Trees F, G... and it is likely they will be damaged by the development and need to be felled. 4.1

One of the reasons Devon County Council had refused Aggregate Industries' application to quarry Straitgate Farm was because: 

6. The proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of mature trees and hedgerows leading to the fragmentation of habitat corridors, contrary to Policies M16 and M17 of the Devon Minerals Plan, Policy D3 of the East Devon Local Plan and Policies NP1, NP2 and NP8 of the Ottery St Mary and West Hill Neighbourhood Plan. 

The Council defended this reason for refusal at the Public Inquiry when the company appealed. 

However, by that time, Aggregate Industries had changed its story about trees F and G. Representatives for the company assured Government Planning Inspectors that the site entrance could be created without harming these trees or their roots. 

In their subsequent report, the Inspectors recognised that these 200-year old oaks "are worthy of protection and should be retained". This was secured by Condition 41, which states, unequivocally:

Outside the designated mineral working areas, trees shall not be felled, lopped or topped or have their roots damaged and hedgerows shall not be removed, thinned or cut back without the prior written consent of the Mineral Planning Authority.

What could be clearer than that? 

East Devon District Council also recognised that the trees were worthy of protection and last year put a Tree Preservation Order on both. 

The trees contribute to the amenity and character of the area and they are considered under threat from development and the impact of heavy machinery and vehicles.

The Council was of the view that:  

The detailed plans submitted by Aggregate Industries show both trees being retained but then states that tree F (named as T3 in TPO) and tree G (named as T2 in TPO) ‘will be monitored and only removed if necessary’. This is somewhat ambiguous and raises concern that the trees may not be given the full protection during construction if it’s considered that the trees can be removed ‘if considered necessary’.  

It is noted as stated by the Objection [from Aggregate Industries], that the trees are protected by Condition 6 of The Appeal as they are shown as being retained on the plans (albeit with the caveat of ‘will be monitored and only removed if necessary’). However, with the conditions being only short-term and the rather ambiguous wording, it is considered that TPO will therefore help ensure long-term protection and that they are appropriately managed by current and future owners.

It is a criminal offence to wilfully damage or destroy a protected tree without consent from the local authority. TPOs allow the potential for "unlimited fines" in the case of damage:  

in determining the amount of fine, the court shall take into account any financial benefit which has resulted, or is likely to result, from the offence.

You would think that that would be the end of the matter. But no. At a meeting last month, Aggregate Industries said it would try not to damage oak trees F and G. 

Try. And in writing this month, Aggregate Industries confirmed: 

Our tree and highway consultants are looking at this issue and I will be able to update you in due course. I would refer you to approved plan reference R22/L/3-3-005 which clearly labels Trees F and G as "condition of tree to be monitored and only removed if necessary". 

Removed if necessary. It’s a surprising position to take, not only because of the clarity of Condition 41, and the TPO, but also because – as East Devon District Council recognised – the approved plans (listed below) all show the oak trees retained:

0308.101 rev F Junction improvement scheme layout 

0308.104 Junction improvement long section 

SF/RS/XX Road Section AB 

SF/RS/XX Road Section CD 

Clearly, Aggregate Industries thinks it’s above planning conditions and TPOs. Integrity?

Ignominious twist: Straitgate may have to be mothballed until better times – says AI

At the Public Inquiry in October 2022, Aggregate Industries assured Government Planning Inspectors that the need for minerals from Straitgate Farm was "urgent": 

8.3 The landbank for Devon is below the required 7 year supply and as such the need can be considered as urgent. Combined with the lack of supply in the wider region which is detailed in the follow paragraphs, the need for the development is indeed considered urgent. 

Aggregate Industries’ Mr Kimblin KC concluded in his closing statement: 

170. The essential planning circumstances in this case are so very simple. The appeal site is one of two allocations in the DMP and the site is needed in order to maintain a steady and adequate supply of minerals, which the MPA is presently failing to provide. 

Needed. Urgent. So very simple. 

And yet, after struggling over many, many years to win planning permission to quarry Straitgate Farm – after fighting tooth and nail to make sure the site was in the Minerals Plan, after extensive site investigations, after two failed planning applications and a successful, but time-consuming and expensive appeal, after putting local people through decades of blight and aggravation – Aggregate Industries is now talking about mothballing the site.

How has it come to this? 

Around the same time Aggregate Industries’ representatives made those claims to Planning Inspectors, another aggregates company in Devon was having altogether different concerns. It was not thinking needed and urgent. Precisely the reverse. 

Aggregate Industries is not the only company in Devon with reserves of sand and gravel from the Budleigh Salterton Pebble Beds, the material that underlies Straitgate Farm. 

Heidelberg Materials – or Hanson under a previous guise – owns Town Farm Quarry near Burlescombe in Mid Devon, close to the Devon/Somerset border. As-dug mineral from this quarry has previously been processed at Whiteball Quarry, 2 miles away in Somerset, which is itself only 4 miles away from Aggregate Industries’ Hillhead Quarry, where Straitgate material would be processed. 

Heidelberg’s permission for Town Farm – extended in 2023 – does not have the same long list of restrictive constraints that faces Aggregate Industries at Straitgate Farm. Town Farm material does not need to be transported 23 miles between quarry face and processing plant, neither does it need to be worked and hauled using equipment and HGVs fuelled with expensive HVO. 

And yet, even without these cost constraints, Heidelberg is not currently able to make the numbers work at the Town Farm and Whiteball sites, both of which were mothballed in 2023. Last year, a Devon County Council Monitoring Report stated: 

As of 1st February 2023 it was confirmed that it has been necessary for Hanson to undertake a review of its Whiteball and Town Farm operations due to current economic conditions, in order to cut production capacity and reduce overheads and the decision has been made to temporarily mothball the Town Farm site until market conditions improve. 

This year's Monitoring Report tells the same story. Heidelberg says the operation is still closed. 

A number of issues will have conspired against Heidelberg: energy costs, red diesel rebate loss, interest rates, house-building slump, Liz Truss etc. The situation is unlikely to change anytime soon. Last week, the Mineral Products Association reported that "weakness persists for heavyside building materials": 

....ready-mixed concrete sales have plummeted to historically low levels, hit by the contraction in housebuilding, which compounded longer-term weaknesses in demand from new commercial offices and retail projects which have been subdued since 2017. 

...demand for primary aggregates has been supported by the requirement for bulk fill materials on major infrastructure projects, particularly from HS2, but the lack of significant new infrastructure projects outside of the country’s only major rail scheme remains a concern.

The Construction Products Association says the sector is heading for a worse recession this year than previously expected.

Aggregate Industries will have been cock-a-hoop last year to have finally won the keys to plunder the green fields of Straitgate Farm, but, at a meeting last month, the company admitted that economic conditions are not currently conducive to the viability of Straitgate, and that once the permission is implemented the site could be mothballed.

Questioned more on the subject, the company would not be drawn further:

... we have 10 years from the date of commencement to extract the mineral and that remains our intention.

However, even with a fair wind, it’s hard to see Aggregate Industries ever making the figures work for the site – given the gargantuan haulage distances involved and the HVO fuel premium.

But hey. If the company has backed itself into an uneconomic corner, it has no-one but itself to blame; no-one forced the company to process the Straitgate material 23 miles away – a 46-mile round trip for every load of as-dug material, material that includes a 20% waste factor – or to work the site and haul material using expensive HVO fuel. It came up with those ideas all by itself. 

As far as we’re concerned, however, the writing has been on the wall for some time. We’ve been questioning the viability of the site since long before this early post in 2012 – pointing to the fact that the company has access to little more than 5% of the material first thought possible, and asking What is AI’s bottom line, because it surely can’t be profit?

In fact, so concerned were we for Aggregate Industries' financial wellbeing – haha – we even created a viability label. Given the amount the company will have spent on winning those green-field keys – after a decade of fees to consultants and lawyers – the company should have perhaps heeded our advice.

But when did Aggregate Industries ever listen to Joe Public?

Denmark passes new law to recycle more building materials

Denmark aims to increase the recycling of construction materials: https://t.co/N1mgcHtlAn #sandcrisis

— Vince Beiser (@VinceBeiser) April 30, 2024

The Danish government has approved new legislation mandating recycling plans for buildings exceeding 250m2 scheduled for demolition. The Danish Minister for the Environment warns: 

We can’t keep extracting sand and gravel.

Holcim’s climate legacy laid bare in Carbon Majors database

Climate scientists are alarmed, reported the Guardian earlier this month:

This is the 10th consecutive monthly record in a warming phase that has shattered all previous records. Over the past 12 months, average global temperatures have been 1.58C above pre-industrial levels. 

For those looking to apportion blame, the Carbon Majors database was helpfully relaunched a few days before: 

The Carbon Majors database traces 1,421 GtCO2e of cumulative historical emissions from 1854 through 2022 to 122 industrial producers, the CO2 portion of which is equivalent to 72% of global fossil fuel and cement CO2 emissions since 1751. Over 70% of these global CO2 emissions historically can be attributed to just 78 corporate and state producing entities. 

Cement producer Holcim – parent company of Aggregate Industries – is one of them, 63rd on the list:

What might the legal consequences of this be? 

The Carbon Majors dataset has played a pivotal role in holding fossil fuel producers to account for their climate-related impacts in academic, regulatory, and legal contexts. Examples include quantifying the contribution these entities have made to global surface temperature, sea level, and atmospheric CO2 rise; and establishing corporate accountability for climate-related human rights violations.

Indeed, Holcim has already found itself at the sharp end of climate litigation, as previously posted.

Carbon Majors is a historic production database used to quantify emissions from 122 of the biggest fossil fuel and cement producers. The dataset contains emissions data from 1854 through 2022. pic.twitter.com/aMv3aTf0et

— InfluenceMap (@InfluenceMap) April 4, 2024

Fascinating case for legal responsibility by @ECCHRBerlin: cement industry is responsible for ≈8% global annual CO2 emissions, almost 3x aviation industry; Holcim is a Carbon Major whose contribution has been quantified (https://t.co/gO1YYHf69U) Details: https://t.co/QuASMeHiJ0 https://t.co/bcHztqWypk

— Lucy Maxwell (@lucysmaxwell) July 13, 2022

‘Circular solutions vital to curb environmental harm from cement and concrete’

Excellent article in @MongabayOrg @Sean_Mow on how essential it is to reduce the impacts & consumption of concrete, feat @aurora_torresm talking about the biodv impacts & me about the need to eventually transition to a post-growth infrastructure stock https://t.co/PcCA609aC8

— Sophus zu Ermgassen (@sophusticated) April 19, 2024

* Cement and concrete production is responsible for significant pollution, human health impacts and vast amounts of climate-fueling emissions. 

* Manufacturing cement is particularly problematic as the chemical process used to make it produces nearly 8% of global carbon emissions. Experts also underline that demand for the mined and quarried aggregate materials used to make concrete, such as sand, is responsible for biodiversity and ecosystem harm. 

It’s estimated that around 30 billion tons of concrete now gets used each year, already posing huge extraction, pollution and greenhouse gas emission risks, even as production surges in the Global South as the construction industry ramps up. “That starts looking like quite an enormous pressure on our planetary boundaries,” says Sophus zu Ermgassen, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Oxford. 

Circular solutions are urgently needed to address environmental threats at multiple points along the cement and concrete supply chain, say experts such as Jonathan Duwyn, a buildings and construction specialist with the UN Environment Programme’s Climate Change Division. Research indicates that quarrying for construction minerals — including sand, stone and gravel — poses a threat to at least 1,000 species planetwide, according to Aurora Torres, an ecology and sustainability researcher at the University of Alicante. 

It’s estimated that around 50 billion tons of sand is used annually for construction, generating an array of environmental problems and social challenges. Research indicates these activities take a toll at the ecosystem level, and with human health by degrading air and water quality, and even influencing infectious disease spread in sand mining areas.

Two months on – PZ2017/03 is STILL underwater

On 12 February this year, we posted Water level at borehole PZ2017/03 rises to GROUND LEVEL.

By 18 February, the situation was even worse:

Last week – more than two months on, and now with monitoring equipment finally installed – the top of the piezometer was still underwater:

The sand and gravel that Aggregate Industries wants at Straitgate Farm starts on average 2.3m below ground level. The company’s permission only allows quarrying above the maximum water table.

Clearly this is one area where extraction should not be taking place.

So, how close to this area could extraction be permitted? Aggregate Industries is in no position to say. As we previously posted: 

Piezometer PZ2017/03, at the NE corner of Phase 1 and SE corner of Phase 2, is obviously unable to provide any meaningful information on how far to the west of this point the maximum groundwater levels would allow sufficient depth for mineral extraction, given water levels here have reached ground level. 

Clearly, therefore, there need to be further boreholes drilled at the redrawn eastern boundary of the extraction area – to fulfil Condition 30, ie. so that there are piezometers at "each corner of each working sub-phase".

How do companies make themselves look green?

The is how Aggregate Industries does it – as any visitor to aggregate.com/sustainability will see:

 

Of course, many companies face the same problem – what photo to put on your sustainability page, to make yourself look green? 

But what if your business is concrete – the most destructive material on earth? What to choose then? 

Aggregate Industries has chosen a photo of a green living wall. 

If only all buildings were made like this, you might think. Green walls: 

Remove air pollutants 

Reduce urban temperatures 

Reduce energy consumption 

Improve biodiversity 

Attenuate rain water 

Reduce noise 

etc, etc

What a wonderful company Aggregate Industries must be, you might think, to produce such a product. 

You might think that, because next to the photo the company writes "Our Sustainable products". 

Yet Aggregate Industries does not design, make or sell green walls. 

The photograph is greenwash. 

Aggregate Industries does not even operate in the same country as the photographed building.

The magical #livngwall of the Musee du quai Branly #Paris is a 200m long by 12m tall carpet of exotic #biodiversity which echoes the diversity of the artists who exhibit at the museum. #sustainability #architecture #sustainablearchitecture#greenwall  #greenroofs #verticalgarden pic.twitter.com/xEF6vTeCle

— SUSTAINABILITYBAE (@sustbae) October 7, 2021

Aggregate Industries' parent company – which also has form in this area – does however operate in Paris. It is not known for its green walls either – but is known for polluting the Seine.

Aggregate Industries resumes sustainability reporting

Back in 2020, we asked "Has Aggregate Industries given up reporting CO2 emissions?". We wrote:

... go to Aggregate Industries’ Sustainability Reports and Policies page and what do we now find? Not the back catalogue of sustainability reports previously there, nor a shiny new one for 2019. 

What we find instead is parent LafargeHolcim’s 2019 report – while Aggregate Industries’ CO2 numbers are suddenly nowhere to be found. 

We can obviously help with the back catalogue of reports – 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2000 – plotting Aggregate Industries’ CO2 journey: a company now emitting in the region of 1.3 million tonnes of CO2 each year, more than 5 times the amount it did in 1999. 

But has Aggregate Industries really given up reporting carbon emissions? 

Is it because the numbers stubbornly refused to fall despite best efforts, or is it because the company stubbornly refused to embrace more sustainable ways? 

Aggregate Industries' application to quarry Straitgate Farm would of course indicate the latter.

This time last year, aggregate.com/sustainability was still not showing a sustainability report, although the company had in fact been burying CO2 figures for 2020, 2021, and 2022 in financial reports lodged at Companies House.

So, is Aggregate Industries now ready to report its sustainability figures publicly again? Is the company ready to broadcast how much CO2 it is emitting? Are the figures at last going in the right direction? Does it finally have a positive story to tell?  

Clearly, the company thinks it does. In August last year, before leaving the company for sunnier climes, the then sustainability director issued these two reports:

 

The sustainability report for 2022 claims: 

Investments within our cement plant and efficiency improvements across all business areas have helped to reduce emissions compared to our 2020 baseline. 

How emissions compare with all the previous baselines the company has set in the past, the report does not say. In 2018, we posted If AI’s record is an example of corporate action on climate change, we’re all screwed.  

On nature, the report is proud to tell us: 

Our Hillhead Quarry, near Cullompton in Devon, has a new woodland after we teamed up with a group of local residents and members of local environmental group the Uffculme Green Team, to plant around 1,100 trees. Native species including English oak, hornbeam, hazel, blackthorn, hawthorn and holly were planted to provide more wildlife-friendly habitat in the area. The scheme will benefit all species, but in particular the hazel dormouse, an elusive and declining species whose numbers have dropped by 50 per cent since the millennium and for which the south-west is somewhat of a stronghold. 

Bravo. But of course, that’s the same elusive and declining species prevalent in the ancient hedgerows at Straitgate that Aggregate Industries has earmarked for destruction. 

In the company’s Sustainability Strategy 2023 Update, the buzz word is community – which is as it should be, given the invasive nature of the company’s business model:

We will strive to make a positive impact on those communities where we live and operate.

We also recognise that our operations can have a negative impact on some of our neighbouring communities and we are committed to proactively eliminating or minimising this impact, wherever possible. We already have stringent planning obligations in place at many of our sites, which limit operating hours, number of truck movements, noise levels and dust emissions. However, we are committed to going above and beyond legal compliance which we see as our minimum requirement. We already do this in many cases and proactively engage with our local communities through meetings, open days and school visits. We also recognise that we are able to contribute to our neighbouring communities by donating staff time for volunteering activities, materials to help with local projects as well as monetary contributions. We are not only committed to continuing this but we will build on these successes. 

So, let’s see what happens at Straitgate. 

Let's see how far above and beyond the company is prepared to go.

Let's see how the company proactively engages with this neighbouring community, that has so far seen nothing but blight and aggravation. 

Let's see how much the company is able to contribute.

Let’s see if Aggregate Industries can walk the walk.

Aggregate Industries’ Straitgate update for March

At a meeting last week, an update was provided by Aggregate Industries’ Planning Manager in relation to the implementation of the company's permission to quarry Straitgate Farm.  

Aggregate Industries is currently working on a number of schemes to satisfy pre-commencement planning conditions, including for HVO fuel use, dust, airport safeguarding, and water monitoring, together with a school travel plan, an archaeological scheme of investigation, a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan and a Construction Environmental Management Plan. 

In relation to water monitoring, a new team of hydrogeologists is now on the case; such work was previously undertaken by Wood/AFW/AMEC. This week, data loggers have been installed in all the piezometers, to resume the measurement of groundwater levels after a two-year break. Monitoring of 21 private water supplies surrounding Straitgate has now also started, which will include analysing water samples on a monthly basis. Stream flow monitoring will begin at a number of locations around the site as well. Twelve months of baseline water monitoring is required by the permission. The surface water management scheme is awaiting onsite infiltration tests, which are expected to be performed in June.  

Ecology surveys have also started. 

Aggregate Industries hopes to submit, for approval by Devon County Council, all the schemes to discharge pre-commencement planning conditions by the end of this year. It hopes to start site entrance works by the summer of 2025. The company has until 5 January 2026 to implement the permission.

Aggregate Industries appoints a new sustainability director, again

In June 2021, Kirstin McCarthy joined Aggregate Industries.

 

Welcome to Kirstin McCarthy, who joins ExCo team as our Sustainability Director, an exciting role to help deliver our ambition of becoming a leading sustainable business. Find out more about her career: https://t.co/xC95ylJoe5 #Construction #PeopleMoves pic.twitter.com/wIy84wSUTw

— Aggregate Industries (@AggregateUK) June 7, 2021

She had joined from Birmingham Airport, "where she worked in environmental management for more than 20 years and was head of sustainability for the past six." 

The position was new for Aggregate Industries. CEO, Dragan Maksimovic, proudly proclaimed: 

This appointment is placing us in a unique position at the forefront of our industry and we must continue challenging ourselves to continuously reduce our carbon footprint through innovation, commitment and personal accountability. 

Ms McCarthy added: 

I look forward to making my mark as the newest member of the executive committee and contributing to building a greener, smarter world for all. 

Six months later, Kirstin McCarthy came to County Hall in Exeter, to present to the councillors on the Development Management Committee, who were determining Aggregate Industries’ long-running planning application to quarry Straitgate Farm – see 24 minutes into this video.

Despite being new to the minerals industry, she was one of only two speakers put forward by Aggregate Industries. Clearly the company feared the proposal’s sustainability – or lack of – might be an issue.

My name is Kirstin McCarthy and I am the sustainability director at Aggregate Industries. I sit on the executive committee and I’m responsible for improving and accelerating our sustainability performance. I took a key interest in this application owing to some of the environmental concerns raised by the community. I have personally reviewed the environmental statement and feedback to date. My role here today is to provide assurance that this scheme will not have the detrimental effect that has been described by some of our objectors and most importantly I am here to listen to the concerns raised by our neighbours so that we can understand what work is required with the community to hopefully allay some of these fears.... etc etc 

Straitgate is sustainable because it’s about Devon making its contribution to the mineral supply in an environmentally responsible manner

Stirring words, but there was nothing about the wholly unsustainable 2.5 million miles in total that material would need to be hauled for processing, at a plant 23 miles away. 

That thorny issue had been greenwashed away in a S106 agreement that came to light a few days before the DMC meeting. No doubt fearing a backlash from decision makers, Aggregate Industries had committed to only using HVO fuel in the HGVs and onsite equipment. Fantastic news you might think, but some studies put HVO worse than regular diesel when changes in land use are accounted for. Even so, it has hefty financial implications, given the price premium of HVO, the intensive haulage plan, and the 7mpg or less managed by HGVs. 

What part Ms McCarthy played in the HVO decision, what mark she made as newest member of the executive committee, we will never know, but despite this commitment, and others, her presentation plainly didn’t cut it with councillors, who voted to refuse Aggregate Industries plans by 5 votes to 0, with 3 abstentions. 

Of course, as we all know, the company appealed and a Public Inquiry was held in 2022, which led to the decision being overturned. 

Elsewhere in the construction world, in December of that year, another sustainability director was being appointed – in this case Anna Baker at Kier Construction: 

Anna’s drive to really make a difference and proven ability to see the big picture will complement the work being done across the Group to achieve our targets in sustainability.

Anna Baker added: 

This is an exciting time to join Kier, a business I’ve long admired. With so much great work already underway, I’m looking forward to bringing my experience to the role and leading on the next steps of Kier’s sustainability journey for the Construction business.

The exciting times didn’t last. This month, little more than a year later, we find Anna Baker has joined Aggregate Industries as its Sustainability Director. 

Anna brings more than 20 years’ experience in sustainability within the construction industry and is responsible for accelerating the company’s journey to net-zero before 2050. 

Kirstin McCarthy, has moved on to sunnier climes: 

I’m happy to share that I'm starting a new position as Director of Sustainability at Sandals Resorts International! 

And who can blame her? 

This now means that – together with the Quarry Manager – both of Aggregate Industries' representatives at the 1 December DMC meeting have left the company. No wonder we asked: 

Is there anybody left working at Aggregate Industries who has played a meaningful part in putting together the plans to quarry Straitgate Farm?

EDIT 15.4.24 Aggregate Industries appoint new sustainability director:

Commenting on her new role, Ms Baker said: ‘Aggregate Industries is a future-focused and innovative company with sustainability at the heart of its vision. I’m thrilled to be joining this business and look forward to working alongside the talented teams here to deliver an ambitious sustainability agenda that will add real value for our customers and communities.’

What Straitgate and 5 other mineral appeal decisions tell us – says AI’s KC

Richard Kimblin KC, of No5 Barristers’ Chambers, represented Aggregate Industries at the 8-day public inquiry in October 2022, instigated by the company following Devon County Council’s decision to refuse the company's application to quarry Straitgate Farm. 

It had been a busy 12 months for Mr Kimblin. 

In November 2021, he attended a 9-day planning inquiry representing Brett Aggregates in its attempt to overturn the decision of Hertfordshire County Council to refuse an 8 million tonne extension at the former Hatfield Aerodrome located between St Albans and Hatfield. 

In June 2022, he attended a 7-day planning inquiry representing Hanson in its attempt to overturn the decision of Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council to refuse a 10 million tonne extension at Craig yr Hesg Quarry in Pontypridd. 

In August 2022, he attended a 7-day planning inquiry representing Aggregate Industries in its attempt to overturn the decision of Dorset Council to refuse a 930,000 tonne extension at Chard Junction Quarry in the Dorset AONB. 

Trying to overturn local mineral decisions is seemingly Mr Kimblin's thing.

Two appeals went Mr Kimblin's way – Craig yr Hesg and Straitgate – and two didn't – Hatfield and Chard Junction. It was a 50% success rate for Aggregate Industries too, winning Straitgate but losing the ability to continue quarrying at Chard. 

Last year, Mr Kimblin gave a presentation about the four appeals, plus two others at Ware Park (Bengeo Field) and Lea Castle*, at the Minerals Planning Conference, an event where members of the Mineral Products Association – the trade association representing Aggregate Industries et al. – get the chance to rub shoulders with council planners and others. 

More than 300 delegates, in person and on-line, attended the 2023 MPA/RTPI conference ‘Minerals Planning at a Crossroads’ on 15 June in London to hear from a range of expert speakers about the challenges facing minerals planning and how these may be met. 

The programme tells us the aim of Mr Kimblin's talk:

Richard Kimblin KC returns to the Minerals Planning Conference this year to provide the legal update. Richard will offer insight on legal issues arising from recent minerals planning appeals, issues which developers and decision-makers can help each other to avoid and a way to avoid lawyers.

Clearly, those poor multinational mineral companies need as much help as possible. 

 

  

The Straitgate Farm decision was picked out by Mr Kimblin specifically in relation to Climate Change • Growing concern for Committees and public, and the used-chip-fat solution advanced by Aggregate Industries in an attempt to mitigate its 2.5 million mile haulage plan. He quoted the Planning Inspectors who had said: 

"...we are satisfied that a condition requiring the use of hydrotreated vegetable oil as fuel would meet the tests in the Framework. On this basis the proposal would accord with Policy M20 of the DMP which requires development to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, climate change resilience and mitigation, including through minimising the atmospheric release of greenhouse gases" Straitgate at §138 

Mr Kimblin also alluded to a pattern. We've made it easier to spot: 

You'd be forgiven for thinking that it didn't matter who turned up at mineral appeal inquiries, how many days they sat, who represented whom, what reports were written, which experts were called or not called, or what was seen on site visits. For these six decisions at least, landscape designation trumped everything – a warning to action groups and mineral companies alike.

* The Lea Castle decision has since been quashed in the High Court and will be re-determined by the Planning Inspectorate, as posted here.

EDIT 3.3.25 

Lea Castle Farm Quarry plan 'has finally failed,' campaigners say 

Inspector's Report

Angry protestors at Pontypridd quarry extension draw ‘heavy police presence’

WATCH: Heavy police presence as crowds turn out to protest at Welsh quarry pic.twitter.com/hAtInp1hOq

— WalesOnline 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 (@WalesOnline) March 27, 2024

We posted about Craig yr Hesg Quarry, at Glyncoch near Pontypridd, back in 2020, when Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council originally rejected Hanson’s plans for a 10 million tonne extension. We edited the post in 2022 when the appeal was allowed.

An article by Ben Gosling in The Planner: The Appeals Annex: A tale of two quarries compared the Craig yr Hesg appeal decision with the one for Chard Junction Quarry in Dorset: 

The inspector in the Craig yr Hesg Quarry appeal accepted that the quarry caused stress and anxiety to locals, but did not accept their evidence that blasting at the quarry caused damage to their homes, because photos of cracks in walls were not supported by a structural survey. In Dorset, the inspector acknowledged that the quarry would cause noise disturbances to residents— after scrutinising a noise impact assessment provided by the appellant. 

Hard evidence is the key, but this can be an unaffordable option for residents and individuals. Heledd Fychan, Member of the Senedd Cymru for South Wales Central recognised this when the inspector’s decision was delivered: 
“Glyncoch is not an affluent area, and the planning inspectorate were critical of the fact that no hard evidence was presented to support their testimony, other than the images,” she said. “Collating such evidence is costly, meaning that communities will always struggle to have their voices and views heard as part of an appeal process without the means to do so. 

She continues: “Their testimony was powerful, and included pictures of cracks that have appeared in their homes which they believe have been caused by powerful blasts at the quarry, clouds of dust above the site, thick dust covering outside tables and cars, and evidence on how the lorries from the quarry are impacting their lives. 

“I find it disappointing that the views of local residents have been completely disregarded in relation to the quarry. Economic drivers and a need for the aggregate have trumped their views, meaning that they will have to continue to suffer the impact of the quarry. A quarry that they have had to live with for decades, and a quarry they were told would close when the last application prior to this was made to extend its life.” 

Last month, work started to erect a new security fence around the newly permitted extension.

This week, angry residents protested at the site drawing "a heavy police presence", as these articles from the BBC, Nation.Cymru and WalesOnline explain: 

Protestors have been gathering near the site of the quarry this week, with dozens joining for a second day of action on Tuesday, March 26. Residents say they are worried about the quarry's impact on their health from silica dust and the proximity to houses and public amenities like schools. They also believe it could disrupt wildlife and cause traffic issues, as well as impacting public rights of way. 

Heidelberg Materials UK has said it has addressed wildlife concerns and that "strict restrictons" on blasting and air quality monitoring were in place as well as other measures to mitigate any negative impact on residents. 

On Tuesday around 40 people gathered near the fence by the quarry site and there was a heavy police presence in the area. Dr Andrew Thomas, a university lecturer in Cardiff, was one of those protesting and said: “It’s fairly peaceful. There are about 40 or 50 of us, families, adults, children. About the same number of police and enforcement officers, about 30 of them. There is a bit of a standoff, but there is no pushing or shoving. 

Dr Thomas said the Welsh Government's decision to permit expansion for 29 years after RCT council rejected the plans was "scandalous", adding that it will leave the site within touching distance of residents' gardens in Glyncoch. 

"It’s been contained behind the mountain but the big controversy here is that this new land was used as a public right of way. So you have a working class community which is about 2,000 people who are literally 100 metres from the site, the legal distance from a quarry in the UK. There is a primary school which is 200m away too. 

"This is encroaching into their back garden. This is totally NIMBY because it is literally in their back garden. It is literally two rugby pitches away. 

"They’re impacted by blasting, which is felt right into their properties at least once a week. They’re also impacted by lorries going to and fro - it is a road which is only really fit for residential driving, not lorries. Their worry is how they are going to move the lorries into and from the new site. It’s a lot of unknowns and as soon as you have that you impact mental health. 

"I think once the dust starts blowing over and they are exposed to silica particles in their lungs… They’ve also lost a green space they were very sentimental about, their children’s upbringing playing in the woods is gone. 

"It blocks off access to parts of the countryside and it hasn’t been made clear how public rights of way will be protected. Nothing has been communicated. 

"I cannot believe this has been signed because it goes against everything the Welsh Government claims to support. It’s so sad. And there is no reason for it to have been done it this way. You can’t stop the planning but you can slow them down doing what they want to do. We don’t believe they care." 

None of this, the blasting, the cracks, the noise, the dust, the health fears, for decades more, would have cut any slack with Mr Kimblin KC – the barrister representing Hanson at the public inquiry, and the subject of this post. In fact, at the Inquiry, he even argued that the refusal by Rhondda Cynon Taf CBC was "perverse" and "unreasonable" and that the Council – a cash-strapped Council "in one of the most deprived areas of Wales" – should pay Hanson’s, now rebranded Heidelberg Materials, appeal costs, a request that was upheld. 

That’s hardly the way to endear yourself to a community facing decades more quarrying.

 

A former nurse who has lived virtually all her life in the shadow of a quarry has provided eloquent testimony to the health fears it provokes in her community ✍️ @ShiptonMartin https://t.co/LLIpktQZtw

— Nation.Cymru (@NationCymru) March 28, 2024

EDIT 5.5.24

Running out of road: the cultural significance of Craig yr Hesg

A foreign firm ships huge quantities of road surfacing out of Wales, when we’re likely to run out of what we need ourselves. And there are other, less quantifiable costs

✍️ @savecraigyrhesghttps://t.co/flZNpXoDEC pic.twitter.com/0K7bzLkm4m

— BylinesCymru 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 (@BylinesCymru) April 14, 2024

What Heidelberg fails to acknowledge is the profound, immeasurable significance of Craig yr Hesg to the people who hold it dear. For them, it represents more than a geological feature with easy access to mineral wealth. It embodies a collective treasure steeped in shared memories and cultural heritage. Heidelberg Materials fails to understand the ancient and deep-rooted relationship between the Welsh people, their language, and the landscape. What’s left of it.

Judge quashes inspector’s green belt quarry refusal over biodiversity net gain ‘error’

Last year, campaigners at Stop Lea Castle Farm Quarry action group suffered a setback in their efforts to stop a controversial quarry plan. 

In 2022, Worcestershire County Council had refused permission for NRS Aggregates to quarry 3 million tonnes of sand and gravel over a period of about 10 years at Lea Castle Farm, near Kidderminster. In 2023, the company appealed the decision. Following an 8-day public inquiry, the inspector rejected the company's appeal concluding the scheme would "not preserve the openness of the green belt". The company applied for a judicial review of the inspector's decision NRS Saredon Aggregates Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor [2023] EWHC 2795 (Admin). In November, the judge found in favour of the minerals company, saying that the inspector had "erred in law" by referring to future legislation on biodiversity net gain. The inspector's decision was quashed. 

You have to feel for the campaigners, who will now face another Public Inquiry. In February, the Planning Inspectorate wrote: 

Following a High Court challenge to our Inspector’s decision on this appeal dated 5th May 2023, the Court has ordered that the appeal be re-determined. This does not necessarily mean that the Inspector will reach a different overall decision.

Fighting mineral applications is not for the faint-hearted.

Judge quashes inspector’s green belt quarry refusal over biodiversity net gain 'error'https://t.co/N6pbOmHAVD pic.twitter.com/nzKawLcbtK

— Planning Magazine (@PlanningMag) November 20, 2023

EDIT 3.3.25 

Lea Castle Farm Quarry plan 'has finally failed,' campaigners say 

Inspector's Report

MP urges Aggregate Industries to change Leighton Buzzard quarry plans

Applications submitted to extend a quarry despite plans to turn it into a waterside park https://t.co/U1BaghjI3E pic.twitter.com/NCV2gx8irk

— LB Observer (@LBOnews) March 19, 2024

Aggregate Industries is on the wrong side of the local community again, this time by apparently reneging on restoration plans at a quarry near Leighton Buzzard that had previously been earmarked as a water sports centre. 

 An Aggregate Industries spokesperson for the Garside Sands operation said: 

We have applied to extend our planning terms to enable an additional 3.3 million tonnes of specialist sands to be extracted from land south of Grovebury Quarry which we estimate would take between nine and 14 years, starting from July 2026 - with a further six years to complete full restoration. 

Andrew Selous, MP for South West Bedfordshire said: 

I very much understand the concerns of Billington residents and have asked Aggregate Industries to mitigate their plans by moving the works further away from peoples homes. I am also pressing for the earliest possible restoration of the site for leisure and recreational use for Leighton Buzzard residents as well.

UK company directors may be personally liable for climate impacts, say lawyers

UK company directors may be liable for climate impacts, say lawyers #ClimateHarm#PierceTheCorporateVeil https://t.co/L5EF4sYzQQ

— @ElaineJohnson (@Elaine_EnvLaw) March 16, 2024

A legal opinion published this week found that board directors had duties to consider how their business affected and depended on nature. These included climate-related risks as well as wider risks to biodiversity, soils and water. 

The analysis said directors of UK firms faced serious personal consequences for breaching these duties, potentially including claims for damages or compensation by their shareholders.

Calls for greater use of recycled sand ‘to help preserve threatened natural resource’

The Sheehan Group have appealed for the construction industry to further embrace recycled sand – to help preserve the threatened natural resource - https://t.co/9gUwaEdm7s#WasteManagement #Waste #Recycling pic.twitter.com/ogp3IV0zWZ

— Access Waste Management (@access_waste) March 20, 2024

Gloucestershire CC ordered to pay £180k after losing quarry appeal

The costs to Councils – and taxpayers – of defending themselves against mineral companies appealing against local democratic decisions became apparent this week. 

In 2023, Gloucestershire County Council refused an application 23/0001/REFUSE by Moreton C Cullimore to extract 1.5 million tonnes of sand and gravel at Bow Farm near Tewkesbury, contrary to planning officer advice. According to Gloucestershirelive: 

...the proposals which also included a concrete batching plant, the creation of clean water ponds, silt ponds and stock piles at the 160-acre site were met with strong opposition from hundreds of residents. A total of 257 people objected, raising concerns over noise, the health and environmental impact of dust generated at the site and the impact it would have on nearby businesses such as Hilton Puckrup Hall Hotel. Some 72 people wrote in support. 

The company appealed. A one-day hearing took place in December. The main issues were: 

• the effect of the proposal on the local economy with regard to dust and noise; and 

• whether the proposal is contrary to the Council’s declared climate emergency and the national planning policy objectives for transitioning to a low carbon future.

In January this year, the inspector allowed the appeal and also ruled that the Council must pay the company's costs. The inspector explained:

The PPG makes it clear that a local planning authority is at risk of an award of costs if it fails to produce evidence to substantiate each reason for refusal on appeal and/or makes vague, generalised or inaccurate assertions about a proposal’s impact which are unsupported by any objective analysis. Other examples of unreasonable behaviour include preventing or delaying development which should clearly be permitted having regard to its accordance with the development plan, national policy and any other material considerations, and refusing planning permission on a planning ground capable of being dealt with by conditions, where it is concluded that suitable conditions would enable the proposed development to go ahead.

And concluded: 

In the planning judgement, it appears to me that having regard to the provisions of the development plan, national planning policy and other relevant considerations, the proposed development should not have reasonably been refused. The refusal of permission therefore constitutes unreasonable behaviour contrary to the guidance in the PPG and the applicant has been faced with the unnecessary expense of addressing these matters.

This week, at a Planning Committee meeting, it was announced that the Council is to pay £180,349 to cover Cullimore's appeal costs. Punchline-Gloucester reported:

Council officers revealed yesterday there was no budget for a loss of this kind and the payment would result in an overspend in the budget.

But councillors on the planning committee said they had "no regrets" and would make the same decision again to try and protect residents and the planet...

Cllr Bernard Fisher (LD, St Paul's and Swindon) said: "It was a majority decision of the committee and that is our prerogative. "If you want to do away with democracy you can have a rubber stamp to go along with all officers recommendations. Like us, they are human and they get it wrong. "People who can afford the most expensive lawyers often win. But not pursuing a case because you can't afford to pay the costs is not the way we should operate. "The people of that area will have to live with this decision. I have no regrets." 

Cllr Susan Williams (C, Bisley and Painswick) said: "I totally agree. I voted against it because I felt it was morally right for me to make that decision. "Without us standing up there won't be change in the future. It needs to start at county level. I stand by my decision."

The £180k the Council must pay is obviously in addition to its own costs for defending the appeal.

  

For comparison, the appeal mounted by Aggregate Industries in 2022 against Devon County Council's decision to refuse planning permission for a quarry at Straitgate Farm resulted in an 8-day public inquiry. The Council defended each of the seven reasons given for refusing permission. At the inquiry, the main issues were: 

i) the effect of the development on water supplies and human health; 

ii) its effect on drainage and flood risk; 

iii) its effect on heritage assets; 

iv) its effect on trees and hedgerows; 

v) its effect on highway safety; and 

vi) its effect on biodiversity. 

vii) The sustainability of transporting sand and gravel by road from Straitgate Farm to Hillhead Quarry. 

No application for costs was made by Aggregate Industries. No costs were awarded by the Inspectors. 

The Council's reasons for refusing the company permission to quarry Straitgate Farm were – despite going against planning officer advice – wholly reasonable.

EDIT 12.4.24 "A hard-fought victory for the quarry everyman"