Important for all residents to read below, if you have not seen the signs as you have driven around the villages.

Dear All

We have today submitted the attached via the comments section on the planning website. Not the most user friendly website but the easiest method appears to be to cut and paste into the general comment section as opposed to amending to suit the particular questions that the website asks you. Also worth describing yourself as a neighbour to the proposed site as opposed to a member of the public. Finally we sent a copy by e mail to the Case Officer Hannah Parish ([email protected]gov.uk)

It is worth e mailing Hannah and requesting a personal visit in order for you to be able to articulate your concerns at first hand. She has responsed to our invitation by advising that she will be carrying out visits as matters progress. Also worth doing the same with your local councillor ([email protected]gov.uk)

Fiona Bruce MP is submitting an objection, and is in dialogue with Jodrell Bank in relation to their objection but there is still no reply, whatsoever, from George Osborne.

Feel free to use some of our objection detail in your own but please don’t simply copy chunks of it or they are likely to be disregarded by the Strategic Planning Committee.

Finally we really need to raise the awareness of the implications of this proposal to residents of Goostrey and in particular those residing on New Platt Lane. They will be the most impacted by the dust that will blow from the site in a North and North Easterly direction. Sibelco openly admit that this will be the case, which is fine for those us at the A50 end of the proposed site but not for those at the Goostrey end. Please cascade this message and our objection detail to anyone that may be interested.

Regards

If you are not sure of the sheer size of this huge operation then have a look at the outline map below, then read the copy of the objection letter below the image

goostrey-sand-quarry

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Copy of there letter below

Application Number 16/4724W

Dear Hannah Parish – Case Officer

We write in order to object to the above planning application at Rudheath Lodge Farm, Knutsford Road, Cranage, CW4 8HJ for the following reasons of significant concern:

  • Sustainable road traffic management and highways concerns

The A50 between Holmes Chapel and Knutsford has had 79 Road Traffic Collisions since 2011 (FOI Cheshire Police) and was previously designated as one of only two ‘Red Routes’ in the entire County due to already existing high levels of danger to road users, cyclists and pedestrians alike.

It is fair to say that this dangerous situation can only be greatly exacerbated by the significant increase of over 100 additional HGV, movements 6 days per week, 52 weeks per year for up to 14 years, and potentially beyond as part of the ‘restoration plan’ outlined by Sibelco. It is also fair to say that there is a strong likelihood that Sibelco will continue to extract sand from the site beyond the 12-year timeframe (with the appropriate extended permissions) a fact that has already been acknowledged as correct by Sibelco themselves. In our opinion the Sibelco Traffic Management Plans are wholly inadequate.

A number of the junctions along the A50 are already at full capacity, most notably London Road A50 at its junction with Chester Road, Holmes Chapel. Sibelco lorries will utilise the full stretch of the A50 to access the M6 at junctions 17,18,19, 20 and beyond.

The overall dangers outlined above are self-explanatory and even if Sibelco were required to develop a significantly more sustainable Traffic Management Plan, any future enforcement of such a plan would be frustrated by the site itself sitting across two Local Authority areas and three Local Policing Units.

We are also extremely concerned about the lack of street lighting, designated and illuminated bus shelters, and footpaths on the A50 in the area of the proposed site.  At present, these factors do not create an overwhelming safety issue but if Sibelco’s plans were to be implemented, this concern would be significantly raised when considering the frequency of lorry movements to and from the site during the darker winter months when road users, cyclists and pedestrians (specifically local schoolchildren) will be placed in even greater danger.

  • Personal impact upon 6 Goostrey Lane, Cranage, CW48HE

Our home, on every floor, faces into the proposed quarry site. We are the most impacted upon individuals within this overall proposal. We urge the Planning Committee to respect our Human Rights in particular Protocol 1, Article 1, which states that a person has the right to peaceful enjoyment of all their possessions, which includes their home and other land.   

Whilst Sibelco have stated that they intend to take some steps to mitigate the impact upon our property through tree planting and soil screening, our privacy is wholly compromised as anyone in the field of the proposed site is able to see directly into our home and garden from within 150 metres. Indeed, if a Sibelco employee or contractor were to stand on the perimeter line of the site beside our house, they would be standing no less than 2 metres from the sofa in our lounge.

The ditch or stream referred to as the ‘Boundary of the Site’ and marked in red on the planning map, is less than a metre away from our lounge which overlooks the fields via floor to ceiling windows and doors (for privacy and security issues we are unwilling to provide photos to evidence this as they would be shared publicly, however, if there is facility to submit photos on a confidential basis we are more than happy to do so).

Due to the overall layout of our property, our privacy has already been and will continue to be significantly impacted upon. During surveying work for the Environmental Impact Assessment our privacy was compromised to such an extent that Sibelco themselves acknowledged the infringements and agreed to notify us in advance of anyone entering the field adjoining our property as it is so close to our garden, lounge, kitchen, study and main bedroom. This is clearly not a feasible tactic or option in the long term if planning permission were granted, and indeed the ‘infringements’ in the past have been lone individuals, not a team of workmen equipped with machinery and vehicles. This in itself is acknowledgement that the infringement of our personal privacy, even when soil screens and trees are in position, is an issue of paramount importance in our objection to these plans. In addition, we have concerns that any planted trees will gradually reduce the amount of natural light and increase overshadowing onto our property as they mature over the years.

The noise and dust that will be associated with this proposal are a significant concern to us. Sibelco openly acknowledge that both of these issues will be a significant factor for us to deal with, most notably for two whole months in each year that passes, when heavy machinery is utilised to remove the soil during each phase of the operation. As described in the previous paragraph, this would have significant impact upon us due to our proximity to the site. To date Sibelco have been unable to mitigate either of these factors or provide methods for the impact to be reduced to an acceptable level.

  • Environmental impact in relation to the wider community

The proposed site is classed as countryside.

The CWAC Local Plan clearly states that within countryside the following types of development will be permitted:

Development that has operational need for a countryside location, such as for agricultural or forestry operations. Replacement buildings. Small scale and low impact rural/farm diversification schemes appropriate to the site, location and setting of the area.

Development must be of an “appropriate scale and design to not harm the character of the countryside”.

Sibelco’s proposal does not sit within any of these permissions.

In addition, the Cheshire East Local Plan promotes the protection and enhancement of our heritage and countryside.

Whilst we acknowledge that Sibelco’s plans are not permanent, there has to be an acknowledgement that the plans to quarry such a large area will be undertaken for well in excess of a decade. By any reasonable person’s standards this is an extremely lengthy amount of time with potential to be extended beyond that timeframe, and long enough to impose significant, unacceptable, detriment to the wider local community and completely change the local landscape for ever.

We urge the Planning Committee to take both Local Authorities Local Plans and associated viewpoints into account and to also consider Article 8 of the Human Rights Act and the case of Britton vs SOS whereby the courts reappraised the purpose of the law and concluded that the protection of the countryside falls within the interests of Article 8 and that private and family life encompasses not only to the home but also the surroundings (in support and in addition to Article 1 reference above in terms of our privacy)

We also extend an invitation to a representative of the planning department to meet us at our property in order for us to articulate our objections at first hand whether as part of a formal site visit or otherwise.

Yours sincerely

Mr & Mrs Gareth Woods
6 Goostrey Lane
Cranage
CW4 8HE

If you need more information then the wonderful website LoveGoostrey Has a lot of the background information also follow them on Twitter at @goostreyfields

Share This