Last evening, 3rd March, I attended a Public Meeting called by the Parish Council, Chaired by Carol Grant, to consider the possible use of land off the B1136 for gravel extraction, concrete batching plant and subsequently during the restoration period, as a landfill site for inert waste.
There were about 100 residents of the village in the Village Hall, the vast majority, if not everyone appeared to be opposed to the possibility. For my part I attended to listen to the concerns of the residents. At this stage I am not able to express an opinion as I must listen to all sides of the discussion and will then speak at the Planning Meeting if it gets that far. Obviously, I will respond to the consultation, and in general terms I will be asking the County Council to look very carefully at the following points: many of which were raised by residents,
1 The site is on the top of a hill, close to the village church and which overlooks the village.
2 Extra traffic is an issue, I believe the County Council should consider imposing restrictions on traffic from the site from using the Raveningham Rd.
3 The use of the B1136 would add many additional HGV lorries to the already hazardous junction with the A146 at Hales. I believe major road improvements would have to be considered here. The Haddiscoe end of the B1136 is soon to be improved for safety reasons, nothing to do with this proposal.
4 As the proposed site is near to the centre of the rural village noise from the site and the plant area would be very intrusive in the village.
At the meeting I promised to give details of MP’s, and others who the residents may wish to write to, these are:-
Christopher Beazley MEP, e-mail christopher.beazley@europarl.europa.eu
Richard Bacon MP, Website: www.richardbacon.org.uk
Tony Tomkinson County Councillor, comments can be left on this site.
William Kemp SN District Councillor, wkemp@s-norfolk.gov.uk
I was also asked to let people know the name of the contact for Raveningham Parish Meeting. You should write to Mr B Vyse, The Lawns, Beccles Road, Thurlton, Norwich, NR14 6AJ.
In conclusion, please use the comment box at the end of this Blog, the more comments that are made the greater chance you have of getting a collective voice heard. My thanks go to the Parish Council for organising the meeting and to the residents for turning up in such numbers. Did anyone do a count?
To leave a comment, single click on the word comments, this will take you to the response box. Please fill in your name and e-mail address otherwise your response will not be forwarded to me.
Cllr Tony Tomkinson's Weblog 
To site a gravel extraction operation at the site of two dangerous roads which intersect in Haddiscoe village would inevitably lead to fatalities. There are already fatalities on the Haddiscoe bends as a result of tourists underestimating the severity of the bends and as a result of HGV lorries turning onto the Hales Road from sideroads – this proposal would make matters far worse. The surrounding roads are too small to take extra traffic volumes or lorries in the event of an accident and this would result in a threat to the personal safety of residents, damage to the roads and potentially to the houses.
By: Roy Haynes on March 4, 2008
at 11:59 am
Having recently purchased land along Thorpe Road we are very concerned that when the site (if it goes ahead) is backfilled with waste, over time this waste will decay and go into the soil. We intend to have horses on our property but want to know if the land around the site will become contaminated in the future and so become unuseable for grazing. At presant we live in Hales and also feel that the approval of this site would only increase the accidents that regularly occur on the two junctions leading onto the A146 from the Yarmouth Road. There are already two gravel pits in the local area and feel that we dont need any more here. Haddiscoe is a lovely village which is why we have brought land there, this proposal of a gravel pit will only drive local people away and deter new comers and eventually destroy it. DONT LET THIS HAPPEN.
By: jane Rodwell on March 4, 2008
at 12:45 pm
At present I live in Low road Haddiscoe, and have lived there all my life, it has always been a nice quite and safe village. I have recently bought a house oppersite the church on Beccles Road, which at present I am renting out but one day hope to move into, if I had have known about the proposed landfil I would have strongly reconsidered buying this house!! I am now worried that if this plan goes ahead that I am going to end up with a very large morgage and a house which is no longer worth as much as the loan that I have against it!!
If this landfill is to go ahead I would also reconsider my decision to live in the village, as the house that I have bought is on the main road and very close to the Hales turning, there will be a large number of lorries going past at all hours and the smell in the summer is bad enough from composting up the road let alone a landfill as well.
I though hard about where to buy my first house and was so pleased when I was able to buy one in the country, the perfect place to bring up a family, and enjoy life.
I feel that if this preposal goes ahead that I am going to loose all of that and so will many other people in the village.
I am strongly against this proposal not only for the personal reasons that I have stated above but also at the meeting last night there were a lot of environmental and safety issues raised which all cause consern to anybody living anywhere near the proposed site.
By: Gemma Colby on March 4, 2008
at 1:31 pm
Horrified at the prospect that any person could consider the venue to be suitable given the road conditions and high accident rate. In the 25 years since I have lived in the village there have been several deaths on the Haddiscoe bends, there is a primary school on the main road plus the noise would travel over miles due to the nature of the village. As a partner in a building firm we KNOW how much noise and traffic this will create over than that admitted at this stage.
By: shirley j colby on March 4, 2008
at 3:02 pm
Dear Mr Tomkinson,
I have been a resident of Haddiscoe for over 22 years and am involved with many community activities. Haddiscoe is a nice village with a couple of negative points, mainly the main A143 through the centre and a licensed waste transfer station. At the public meeting many good points were made as to why this project should not go ahead and I agree with the assertion that there appeared little support for a village gravel extraction site and subsquent dump for ‘inert waste materials’.
I appreciate that we need aggregate to build houses and roads but new sites must be chosen with utmost care and consideration. I know that you will take into account the impact on our countryside, residents, enviroment and of course personal safety.
The proposed site would in anyone’s view have a massive adverse impact on the village and the barn owls which can often be seen quartering the same fields.
The B1136 and surrounding roads already suffer heavy traffic.The footpath through the village is presently a slightly risky venture and I cannot imagine that more HGV movements through a small rural village is going to encourage anyone to want to buy property and want to live here. I am afraid that without new people and without young children eventually leads to playgroup and school closures and the steady decline and death of rural communities.I have considered the matter very carefully and I would be very grateful if you would challenge this application when appropriate and ensure that where possible we keep our rural communities intact.
By: David Wilcox on March 6, 2008
at 2:55 pm
I haved lived in Thorpe Road Haddiscoe for 18 years and own two local engineering companies that provide control equipment for many industries including the quarrying industry.
Last year I had a stand at the Derby, Hillhead quarry exhibition, which is the largest in europe.
This involvement with the industry has given me some insight to the practises and side effects caused by quarrying for mineral reserves and subsequent landfills.
The majority of spent quarries, with very few exceptions are used as waste disposal land fill sites for domestic waste, as this provides a cheap solution to the huge throw away society we have all created.
This land filling brings with it waste decomposition which gives two bad side effects of Methane or similar hydrocarbon gases and Lechate.
The gases are normally highly flammable and can give rise to calcergenic problems on long term exposures, and land fills are normally fitted with venting systems and automatic flare burning to burn of the gases, and gas piezo measuring via boreholes
These gas piezo measuring vent stations would be numerous across the site and would for centuries to come provide a hazard, least forgetting the visual impact they would have.
The lechate problem is more serious, it is common knowledge that lechate travels underground for several miles, contaminating and posioning the land.
As we are all aware in Haddiscoe, we live in an area of outstanding natural beauty with the marshes, providing a plethera of wild life and oustanding natural views.
To monitor for lechate, would require monitoring boreholes to be installed across these marshes totally spoiling this natural beauty, this is without considering the adverse effect to the water table or what would happen to water in the dykes which the cattle drink and the infer into the food chain.
Not thinking about the chaos caused during excavation, It is naive for the local landowner or Earsham gravel to propose infill with inert material, that Ms Grant believes, could be road scrapings and crushed rock or topsoil, which commands a commercial price similar to the gravel and sand being extracted in the first place.
It must also be considered this is a long term project 20 plus years, given the changes in corporate ownership in recent years, it is possible that Earsham Gravel may not even exist in its current corporate status, so how can they guarantee any reinstatement proposed.
Given that Ms Grant confirmed a geotechnical survey (a costly expense) has already been carried out, that the land owner has left this land set aside for the last two years and has been planting hedgerow trees, the planning of this scheme has been underway for some time and is obviously close to planning application.
In conclusion , if you could overcome all the traffic, noise, water table change land shrinkage and safety issues which this proposal will most certainly generate, it is utter madness and the result of pure greed by the landowner to destroy immense wildlife habitat and an area of natural beauty by proceeding with this plan, more intelligent planning would almost certainly discover another site that is less detrimental to the environment and the community of Haddiscoe.
Thank you Tim for that comment. At present there is no Planning application and Earsham Gravel have only asked the County Council for a Scoping opinion. They have not asked about misc landfill, but Inert landfill. We will have to wait and see what happens when a planning application is received. but I take your point.
Tony
By: Tim Scales on March 7, 2008
at 2:21 pm
As a resident of Thorpe Next Haddiscoe I attended Monday’s open meeting called by the Haddiscoe Parish Council, to discuss the possible use of land off the B1136 for the use of gravel extraction, a concrete batching pland and landfill, I am appalled by the inappropriateness of the proposal.
The site sits at the highest point of Haddiscoe and other closely related villages, overlooking the reclaimed conservation area of Haddiscoe marshes. All access roads, without exception, are both busy and dangerous and during the Summer months, being a tourist area, are exposed to increased traffic volumes. The adoining A143 Beccles to Gt. Yarmouthy road is already a high-risk accident site and there are almost weekly serious accidents on this section of the B1136. The junction of the B1136 with the A143 situated directly next to the proposed site, is technically a blind junction. Other local roads are already under pressure from other landfill sites and a refuse recycling centre. Over the proposed period of 20 plus years of usage, the area would become a no go area for tourism and local villages would be decimated and undesirable places to live. I was under the impression that we were trying to regenerate our villages, not destroy them!
The site is also adjacent to an historical church, listed buildings and a well used cemetery. The proposal to screen, by use of earth mounds, the area behind the church, would wholly obliterate this prominent ancient landmark from view to the west of the area.
It is totally inappropriate to place this type of industrial site in close proximity to an inhabited area, the dust, the noise (whatever equipment be proposed), the disruption, the dangers, not to mention the potential lanfill elements and health hazards, has to be an idea of madness !!!!
I would also be interested to know if the the Council could give absolute written assure, that over the lifetime of the proposed workings no toxic, medical or nuclear waste would be deposited into this site?
By: Toni Watson on March 7, 2008
at 3:55 pm
I attended the meeting of the Parish Council to hear of the plans for a gravel pit and subsequent landfill site and as with all the people attending – I too was appalled at the idea. There are a million and one reasons why it is would be unsafe both enviromentally and traffic wise. The roads around the site are dangerous enough with the present traffic flow and it is estimated that the heavy lorry numbers would by far exceed that stated of 42 per day. The noise is also a factor. When the Atlas gravel pit was working some two miles from us, the sound of the drumming from the shingle being washed in a large drum was audible to us at our house. The people that live nearer to the proposed pit will need ear muffs as the noise is deafening. As a builder I know what I am talking about and have first hand experience of the noise, traffic and environmental consequences that a pit and landfill site would make. Without stating the obvious, the church is in very near proximity, the rubbish, with the best will in the world blows around and I fear we could see even more deaths on our local roads if this is allowed to go ahead. Whilst we obviosly need gravel and somewhere to dump rubbish – let us not make it at the price of lives, peace and tranquility.
By: Chris Colby on March 8, 2008
at 6:42 pm
I have lived near a gravel pit, North of Norwich most of my life.
I have also worked in and around Haddiscoe and the surrounding area for many years.
Having read all of the comments, it does seem that everyone has heard what they ‘want’ to hear.
‘Inert Waste’ is not household rubbish, it is not chemical or industrial waste. It is subsoil, sand washings and topsoil from this and other excavations that will allow the extracted area to be landscaped and put back to how it was once they have finished the extraction. There is no ‘contamination’ or danger from inert waste.
It is what it says- Inert.
Haddiscoe has had gravel pits for longer than most of the residents have been alive. It will bring new jobs to the village, as well as trade for any local businesses.
Of course no one would choose to have a pit in their neighbourhood, but there is a need for aggregates and the land at Haddiscoe can obviously meet this need. People need sand and stone to build houses, extensions and to put stone on their driveways.
But you’ve already got your houses haven’t you…
If you try and work with the extraction company and tell them your concerns, you may be pleasantly surprised at just how understanding they can be and how much they can provide for your community.
We have had improved roads constructed, hedges and trees planted and have noticed no increased noise or dust as they work to very strict legislation on noise levels and dust suppression.
However, as in most cases, it would seem that everyone has already made their mind up…
Whatever the outcome, just remember that it is the people in a village which make it what it is, not pits, roads or other businesses. There is always an ‘up’ side to everything.
Thanks for the comment, it’s nice to see another point of view, but should we address the proximity to the village and particularly the church, which is certainly one of the prettiest in Norfolk. Tony
By: K. Mills on March 10, 2008
at 4:47 pm
As A Haddiscoe resident for 35 years I cannot share K. Mills attitude to “inert waste”, We have had the experience of inert infill to the west of Crab Apple lane, The operation of this site produced wind blown rubbish, smoke and what was being put in was far from “inert”. One has only to look at the landscaped bundings, and tree screen, around the waste site a mile up the B1136 to see what an eyesore they quickly become.
I would also point to the loss of arable land at a time that the government’s chief scientific officer has said that “We are sleep walking into a food crisis” The U.K. is barely 60% self sufficient in food, pig farmers are slaughtering their animals because they can’t afford the prices of feed. Food prices are rising and this will continue as India and China start to eat, and global warming reduces the world grain harvests through drought.
The Norfolk strategy plan suggests gravel sites could be returned to agriculture, that is not our experience, none of the previous gravel sites in Haddiscoe are now or ever likely to be useful arable land, and a return to agriculture is not prosed for the new sites.
By: Rory Kelsey on March 12, 2008
at 10:59 am
As a resident of Haddiscoe for 18 years, I chose this village to raise my family, because of the rural aspect and open views across the marshes
I disagree with K Mlls comment, they clearly have not read the proposal document or understand the implication of this proposal.
You cannot extract 1.3millions tons and reinstate it with only 244,000 tons, there will be a huge depression in the land either sde of the road, totally out of keeping with the current street scene.
Where could the 1.3million tons of “inert” material come from, the answer is nowhere! They do not intend to totally reinstate, unless its with household waste
Putting in artificial lake and landscaping would be totally out of place, and would spoil the present natural rolling countryside.
Obviously K Mills lives 20 miles away, so its not in their backyard, and they must have a vested interest in gravel extraction.
Likewise they have their house already, that doesnt make it right, clearly they are unaware of Earsham gravels trade in bagged gravel at garden centres, this is not for building, but for profit.
They are also unaware that 100 sites across Norfolk are currently being considered for extraction and waste landfill, regardless of Earsham gravels plans, the county council could make it a waste tip, in contradiction to the proposal.
One of these sites maybe Near K Mills house, but will they welcome it with open arms.? I think not!
This proposal is profit based, the government get £1-2 levy for every ton extracted, Earsham Get 150% tax relief for reinstating their damage, whilst they also charge for dumping the INERT waste and revenue from the sand and gravel extraction
Yes we all know the importance of extraction and landfill, we cannot do without it, but why in the centre of a village?
What does Haddiscoe get out of this, A spoiled village with no community,and the heart ripped out of it, what a legacy for our children and childrens children.!!!!
By: JUDITH SCALES on March 15, 2008
at 10:39 am
I understand the concerns of the residents totally. IF you had read my previous post you will see that I already live near a gravel pit and have done so for 35 years. The original pit is now a dispatch plant and a new pit has been dug and continues to have material extracted.
My point, which you have highlighted so well, is that you are all jumping to conclusions and getting worked up over problems that may well not exist.
No one, given a choice would want a pit, a factory or even a housing development near their house.
However, this is a totally unrealistic view.
Yes, i do have a vested interest. My interest is not to see a village arguing amongst itself over problems that may not exist. THAT is my interest.
We had all the same concerns, all the same arguments, all the same fears. However, when it was passed, the extraction company did all they could to make sure that they caused little if any disturbance to the day to day life of the village.
From reading previous posts it would appear that one gentleman is a builder, who i would assume uses gravel and extracted materials for his trade ?
These all come from a pit near someones home…
maybe my home ?
Another gentleman says that he makes equipment that is used in quarrying and pits.
So he is happy to profit from equipment that is used in a quarry or pit near someones house……but not his…….
The bottom line is that i would hate to see any community in Norfolk arguing amongst themselves or losing sleep because of a pit, a housing development or whatever. Times change, its a fact of life whether we like it or not.
I just thought it might be a good thing to put across a point of view from someone who has had first hand experience of a similar situation and maybe this might help address any fears and may show that some good can come out of any situation.
Unfortunately, it would seem that there are several people who enjoy scaring themselves and others around them and only wish to see their own point of view.
Well, the best of luck to you all, whatever the outcome, but i would like to think that a village doesn’t die just because of a gravel pit.
I was always lead to believe a village lives because of the people in it…….
By: K. Mills on March 16, 2008
at 12:28 pm
We have lived in Haddiscoe for nearly 10 years and would like to fully endorse David Wilcox’s comments.
As for K Mills comments of March 16 we found them to be patronising and don’t beleive this to be a divided village.
By: Sandra & Bill Partner on March 16, 2008
at 7:30 pm
Maybe Mr Mills would like to say what work he was doing in Haddiscoe over the years and for whom? What makes him so knowledgable about the area that he can form such opinions. He is very deluded if he thinks that the village is in anyway split in it’s opinions over this issue, quite the opposite, it has never been so united! If he is so keen on gravel pits maybe he would like to donate his own backyard to this cause.
By: Toni Watson on March 18, 2008
at 12:02 pm
I have been brought up this village, living here all my life and have made a conscious decision to stay here, working hard to recently buy a family home, believing it to be an ideal place to bring up children. So the thought of this proposal fills me with real disappointment, especially that a fellow villager is prepared to cash in on destroying a community.
How anyone truly believes this is an acceptable location for such an industrial, noisy and traffic generating scheme is genuinely beyond me. The proposed site forms the back drop to the beautiful village church, and offers far reaching views of the bordering marshland, in its self an area of ‘Outstanding Natural Beauty’, and frankly, its location could not be any closer to the heart of the village.
To encourage an additional 80 lorries, daily on to the local road network is staggering. Local residents are only too aware of the number of accidents that occur along the B1136, at the Hales junction, along with the numerous fatalities along Haddiscoe Dam A146.
I also find K.Mills comments quite patronising, why do we should we negotiate with the gravel company and ask for the planting of trees and hedges, we already have a beautiful and natural landscape!
I fully understand change is enviable, communities evolve, but these changes need to managed, so to embrace and enhance what we already have, not detract from or indeed destroy it.
By: Chris Burton on March 18, 2008
at 1:33 pm
I like many others have lived in Thorpe Road,Haddiscoe for some considerable time (33 years) and was deeply upset and disturbed that “my” beautiful village would be devastated by the formation of a massive mineral extraction and landfill (rubbish tip)site which would blight the area certainly for my lifetime and maybe that of one of my children who has also chosen to live in the village.
The land in question on either side of the B1136 is the the first thing you see on entering the village and the last thing you see on leaving.
Currently the undulating landscape is overseen by the beautiful St Marys Church.
Regardless of all the other seriously justifiable concerns such as noise ,road safety,dust, pollution, and other environmental issues,this proposal is worth opposing just for the sheer blight on the landscape.Those making the proposals dont care how individaul villagers are affected,it is purely a commercial venture
To suggest that the Village is split is to show ignorance.Yes there may physically be a main road the A143 which bisects the village into East and West but one only had to witness the passion shown by the overwhelming majority of residents at the recent Village Hall meeting and also the general concensus when speaking to people on the street and at other Village functions that this proposal is unjustifiable.
I sincerely hope that the united people of Haddiscoe will continue to fight this proposal with passion and gain the support of those who are in a position to influence those faceless people who ultimately make a decision on behalf of the Village of Haddiscoe.
Villagers dont bury your heads in the sand (or gravel) — unite and fight !!
By: Tony Burton on March 18, 2008
at 2:22 pm
I have lived in Thorpe-next-Haddiscoe for 49 years and am extremely angry and horrified at this selfish and arrogant proposal that would benefit the few at the expense of so many.
The site lies right on top of the village. The road network is incapable of taking this level of traffic and is a disaster waiting to happen. There would be pollution issues involving noise, smell,gases,dust and a threat to the good water quality that the marshes need. There would be no environmental benefit to the community. This is an area of outstanding natural beauty which will be obliterated from view by high bunding (earth banks to you and me). I urge everyone to register a protest before 28/3/08 to the county council because that is when their consultation period over site allocation closes.
THIS PROPOSAL SHOULD BE DISPATCHED WITH THE CONTEMPT IT DESERVES.
By: Stephen Farrow on March 18, 2008
at 11:14 pm
REF : PROPOSED GRAVEL EXTRACTION PLAN FOR HADDISCOE
I must add my voice to those of nearly every other resident of Haddiscoe to register my opposition to the plans proposed by Earsham Gravel and Manor Farms Ltd to impose an unsuitable industry on an environment comprising open fields. All of the issues regarding Traffic and the impact on this small community are negative and would appear to benefit only the proposers. Please do your best to make our views heard.
Thankyou
Tim Haycock
The Hollies
Low Road
Haddiscoe
By: Tim Haycock on March 19, 2008
at 10:07 am
I have received a letter that I believe you would wish me to include in this BLOG. It comes from Lawrence Aldren (age 8 years)
Lawrence says:-
Dear Mr Tomkinson,
I am very upset and worried about the plan to build a gravel pit and fill it with rubbish just behind my garden.
The reason is because I won’t be able to:
Play outside on my own
Too much dirt
Too much noise
Too many lorries
You will wreck the habitat of about 1000 little animals like barn owls.
Also you are not being environmentally friendly because of all the rubbish that will be dumped there.
Please don’t do it.
Yours sincerely, Lawrence Aldren
Thank you Lawrence, for your interest in the proposal and for you concerns about our environment. You are part of the future of this planet and we must listen to your comments.
By: tonytomkinson on March 19, 2008
at 10:32 am
This village has been my home for 44 years. It is now the home of my three children. To make this village a place to live in, nurture wildlife, grow food, improve and care for the land had been the role of our rural industry the farming industry. Quality farmers see that the land they own is also land they hold in trust for future generations. This village should be about the community putting good things in, like the school, the play group. There are projects like Care Farms that are big in Holland that could offer opportunities too to put something back for those in the community if work is the issue.
I dont call digging a massive hole for 30 years in the highest point in the middle of the village and then filling in with dead waste putting anything positive back either for those wanting work or for the community. We will have no way of monitoring what goes in that hole. It is a risk that anything could be dumped there. I am not willing to take that risk. I love this village. I live here, my children were born here, I work in near by Beccles. My kids went to school here and now Loddon. Is the entrance to their village to be past this rape of the landscape? Pits like this are noisy, the rattle of gravel is noisy. The dust , the lorries on narrow roads, the pollution of the ground water, the debrie, the fly tipping. NO not in my home. This must not happen.
By: Sari Kelsey on March 21, 2008
at 6:55 pm
We have lived in Haddiscoe for the last five years after moving from all the noise, pollution and smells that Lowestoft had to offer. The reason we chose to live here was the fact that not only is a great, friendly place to live but it gave us the opportunity to have our own bit of paradise.
Whilst you may think the knee jerk reaction is to say not in my backyard, this village has already experienced what gravel extraction means and the noise, pollution, increased vehicle levels etc that go with it and I believe the views of the people of this village is based on experience, fact and concern.
Now K Mills may have lived with a gravel pit for over 30 years and experienced some benifits, however, with the greatest respect, how can the same benifits be applied here.
We already have hugh issues with the traffic here, the Dam is closed almost on a weekly basis by either a lorry overturning or flooding at St Olaves, we have fought for traffic calming measures in the village and now have a wonderful flashing sign that no-one, except the villagers pays attention to, a local school, where everyday the children are forced to take their own lives into their hands just to get home because of large speeding vehicles.
I work close to Norwich and everyday I risk my life at the Hales turning onto the A146 through an onslaught of vehicles, how much hope does a gravel lorry have?
Now, if this means that we and the surrounding villages who will also be affected get a bypass or better road structure then maybe I could see a benefit.
Noise, dust, smell, health, environment do I need to even explain why I would be against this?
K Mills, how lucky you have been to work in Haddiscoe, in an environment that is idyliac, with a church that is celebrated for its round tower and wonderful setting, how nice then for our future generations to look out and see a large noisy gravel plant and not have the same restful scene that you have had.
By: Andrew and Lindsey Holt on March 25, 2008
at 4:30 pm
With reference to postings by K Mills.
I attended the meeting and have spoken with a number of my fellow villagers and have yet to hear an argument to which he refers, wholehearted OPPOSITION is all I’ve heard.
Raising the points about the people who he claims complain, but could gain from this proposed development is not necessary as at this time they do not have a vested interest, as does Mr Mills, the only interest they appear to have at this point in time is the intended rape of our village.
I am not as naive as some people seem to be regarding waste disposal and can see the inevitable change of policy to include domestic
waste when the local dumping grounds, as was pointed out at the meeting will be exhausted.
Followed by the yet inevitable application for the extension of the extraction area.
Similar to the one reported in the E.D.P. recently.
I could go on with points for objection and my concerns but I have already made most of them known to all the people on the recently circulated contact list.
I URGE ALL FELLOW VILLAGERS TO FIGHT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND ATTEND ALL THE MEETINGS REFERING TO IT.
(this might then, not give some people the impression that the village is not united)
By: CliveGrifiths on March 25, 2008
at 8:44 pm
I have had the immense pleasure to have lived in Thorpe-next-Haddiscoe for the last 12 years. Almost without exception visitors extoll the natural beauty and wide open vistas over the marshes that dominate the Haddiscoe area. From Thorpe Road you have open views up both the Waveney and Yare valleys – and no doubt from the other side of the valleys you will have clear views of the uplands of Haddiscoe!
This development would both physically and metaphorically rip the heart out of the village.
While it is inevitable that any extraction and/or waste site will be close to some houses it is almost unique amongst those suggested in this planning document to so completely dominate the center of a single community. And make no mistake it WILL dominate the village – the INITIAL application covers an area larger than 30 football pitches.
Other people have written about the traffic issues. It is worth remembering that Haddiscoe already takes more than its’ fair share of extraction and waste traffic. Waste traffic form Yarmouth for the Aldeby tip goes through the village – both full and empty. The B1136 takes mineral traffic from the existing extraction site at Norton Subcourse. Both of these sites are included for possible expansion in the same planning process now facing Haddiscoe. In addition the A143, B1136 and other interlinking roads take all the traffic utilising the waste treatment and transfer site near Thurlton.
There has been no attempt to offer anything back to the community: not even the usual ‘carrot’ of possible local employment, no proactive offers by the developers to contribute practically or financially to village life or to pay for road improvements.
All we are offered is a cynically concocted “restoration concept” which tries to tick as many planning boxes as possible, ignoring the realities of creating new habitats. Even if it was possible to create something like the design it would represent little more than a themed park: a few trees here, a small lake there, a tiny reedbed on the side etc. at a time when the professional conservation bodies have recognised the need for large scale habitat creation. Furthermore, what will happen in the long term? While the planning agreement will stipulate that the restored site should be maintained for 5 (or even 20) years it is easy to see that this “wildlife haven” could make more money as a fishing lake with say some log cabins or residential caravans dotted amongst the trees. Again, the site restoration plan would take decades of sympathetic and expert management to make a contribution to the wider environment. It doesn’t bode well when you look at the minimal effort put into creating a shelter belt around the site: in parts more than 50% of the trees are already dead!
To make matters worse no one can confidently predict the impact this development will have on the wildlife dependant on the marshes fed by water from the uplands overlooking the marshes. Recent improvements in water quality and conservation-biased habitat management have seen the return of Water Voles, Otters and Marsh Harriers (to name but a few) to the adjoining marshes.
In summary, I find the thought that the planners, officials and councillors ultimately responsible for deciding the fate of this application could even consider siting this industrial scale development on an elevated site immeadiately adjoining and overlooking the Broads National Park absolutely beggars belief. If this site is developed how can we honestly complain when the rainforests are destroyed or the seas plundered for short term gain?
Don’t let this opportunity to register your views pass by: you have until 5pm on 28/3/8 to let Norfolk County Council know how you feel. If you can, please use the internet by going to http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/nmwdf and register to submit your views and for the chance to win £250! Next, let your MP, MEP, district and county councillors know your opinions, even if this is after the consultation cut-off date.
I don’t want to have to spend the next 20 or more years explaining to my now young daughters how I did nothing while the heart was ripped out of their community.
By: Chris Allen on March 26, 2008
at 3:07 am
Dear, Mr Tomkinson
I have lived in haddiscoe for 3 years now and found it to be a very beautiful and peaceful and safe place to live. I cant believe that this tiny little idyllic village is even being considered for a gravel pit of this magnitude let alone the impact on our community and all the natural wild life. People have moved here to bring up children and for a peaceful life in a rural country side let alone deal with noise and traffic pollution and dust. This is going to have major impact on our little roads that cant carry that sort of traffic its bad enough now. I think its disgusting. would you want to live next to a pit no i don’t think so what about our children we would not feel safe letting them play outside with the traffic on the roads. Also this will have an impact on property value in this area would you want to buy a house here if this goes through no of course you wouldn’t as for the comments of K.MILLS i disagree have it in your garden let see how you feel then ?.
By: MRS ASKER on March 26, 2008
at 12:40 pm
*** Please note the announcement today of an extension to the period of public consultation until approximately 25th April ***
If you haven’t submitted your comments on the proposed quarry and waste site in Haddiscoe you have an extra 4 weeks to do so. This extension applies to all the review documents except the “Core Strategy and Development Control” volume where the original deadline applies for legal reason (per Norfolk County Council).
By: Chris Allen on March 26, 2008
at 2:42 pm
ive lived in norwich city centre for 17 yrs, an in the last 3 yrs ive moved to haddisoe, an since moving here i have much prefered the quiet, peaceful an beautiful surroundings of the countryside, since moving here we have built a summer house which i spend alot of time in an its a very peacful place to go an relax after work, but when a car goes past on thorpe rd u can feel the vibration of it an hear it a great deal, so hearing HGV lorries goin past 40 times a day, how are you supposed to get any peace an quiet with such a great deal of noise going past at all hours? I strongly disagree with the plans to build a pit!!
By: Miss C Asker on March 26, 2008
at 9:12 pm
we have been in haddiscoe for 3 years now and know the day to day runnings of the vilage,and one thing i know its not upto road standards to be running lorrys 24/7 its a job for a car/bike let alone a lorry,also i take my son to school at glebeland and often drive along thorpe rd and up the loke and always see school children walking to school as there’s no paths they walk on the roads its not to dangerous at the moment as all cars are aware of the fact could you imagine what it would be like if this was to go ahead and have Lorry’s coming and going this would cause havoc to these children,and to any unlucky lorry driver to hit one of the children,what do you want the children to do stop going to school..no i don’t thinks so…have the parents take them in causing more traffic on these Rd’s and that may not be possible for some family’s…another point is the country side…we are hearing everyday to preserve the planet and to enjoy the countryside the rate things are going there will be no country side left….look at place like london who are trying to bring the country side in to the city making city zoos/greenery and more trees the reason they do this its realised how important the countryside is.and you want to try and do the opposite by robbing us of our countryside and for what a gravel pit i don’t think so once they get permission i bet you all the money in china they will change there mind and will end up with a huge rubbish dump and what goes with it…lets put it next to the houses of parliament and see what they have to say…by choosing a small village like haddiscoe we get the impression out of site out of mind is being used to judge where to put this pit,we may be a small village but we have a large voice and will do everything in our powers to stop this going ahead…the rate this country is going we wont have much countryside left to enjoy…with rivers getting higher and water flooding is more often it does not make sense…to take more of our countryside and turn it into a pit……the reason most people like the country side is for piece and quiet and no light pollution and for lovely countryside….by putting this pit where you suggest would kill this village over night with lights everywhere and noise from shingle washers and heavy duty lorries coming and going 24/7 you would not dream of putting this in your back garden so don’t put it in ours….very irate resident
By: mr&mrs c.asker on March 27, 2008
at 3:46 pm
My family and I are still relatively new to Haddiscoe, having lived here for just under 5 years but we like to think we have become fully involved in village life here and made many friends. We live in Thorpe Road and have small children. When we moved here we dreamt of them having a quiet rural life as I had experienced growing up (in a small North Suffolk village). My children love nothing more than walking along Thorpe Road, looking at the sheep/ cows in the fields, looking out for the barn owl and having picnics at the existing small gravel pit adjacent to Manor Farm. The thought of them growing up and wanting to play out on their bikes with even more huge lorries and additional local traffic terrifies me. The proposed site is a mere 0.25 miles from our front door and our hearts go out to those (like Lawrence) directly facing and backing on to the site. The main routes for the lorries may be on set roads but I’m sure site staff and delivery drivers will use which ever route is quickest and therefore will also increase traffic on the even smaller roads too.
I had full intensions of attending the meeting at Haddiscoe Village Hall on March 3rd but unfortunately my train was delayed by an hour and I didn’t get back in time. I had no idea until someone kindly put the details through my door yesterday that this proposal would have implications over 20 years. I thank those who have kindly done this but who in the council should be advising us of these plans? For instance I don’t even know what a ‘Concrete Batching Plant’ is or what implications this would have. How can we be expected to support or protest against this proposal if we don’t fully understand what it is?
I understand these sites are a necessity but is there no-where slightly further away from the centre of a village and on a less dangerous road network? The pollution and impact on our heritage described sounds unbelievable.
What effect will the extraction/ refill have on the marshes, water table and environment? I assume a full study has commenced/ will be undertaken to investigate this?
I have asthma and understand doctors have concerns about asthmatics living in close proximity to these type of sites – do you have any additional information from studies in to this please?
The site of the existing sand/ gravel pit behind the Village Hall in Haddiscoe doesn’t give me much hope that this site will be left with a safe, natural, beautiful and aesthetically pleasing look. What guarantees would there be?
I would welcome the opportunity to hear and see Earsham Gravels Ltd’s plans – has anything been scheduled to enable this please? I know there are many sites being proposed but I understand Haddiscoe is one of their preferred sites.
Finally it is already very scary trying to walk pre-school children along the A143 to the Village Hall at 9am in the morning – I can’t imagine how much worse this could be with even more traffic/ lorries.
Please don’t let this happen!!
By: Claire Palmer on March 27, 2008
at 9:59 pm
I am 26 years old and have lived in Haddiscoe for 24 of those years. 5 years ago i bought a house on Church Hill which took us 3 years to renovate. I am now being told that after all my hard work i am to overlook and gravel pit and landfill site. How wonderful!!
I was delighted when i found i could stay in my childhood village and maybe one day raise my own family there now im not so sure!! And who is going to compensate me for the loss of value to my home especially with the high mortgages we have to pay as first time buyers!
With regard to the road structure i think it is ridiculous to expect the roads to cope with the amount of extra traffic that will be generated. In the short time i have lived at church hill i have seen several accidents on the junction and on the hill into Haddiscoe,thats without mentioning the dam which has always been dangerous. And like Mr Farrow i am highly suspicious of the roadworks that started this week on the junction. Very convenient timing!
With regard to the 40 lorries a day that have been mentioned, what about all the people who go to buy the gravel? Thats all extra traffic too!
As for the waste being inert, i strongly believe that once you give the council a hole in the ground they will want to fill it, especially as we are running out of landfill sites.
I really think this is the most inappropriate site for a gravel pit, it is right in the heart of the village which has such wonderful landscapes and an abundence of wildlife. Why destroy it all?
There are only a few set to gain from this and selfish they are.
By: Tanya Colby - Dudman on March 27, 2008
at 11:29 pm
Church Hill, Haddiscoe
Just witnessed car crash outside my house.
The crash count begins!
By: Tanya Colby - Dudman on March 29, 2008
at 6:47 pm
I understand that the consultation period for the Minerals Development Framework has been extended to 25 April – this is the document in which landowners/operators are bidding to have their sites included by the County Council so that they become allocated and hence preferred sites.
As mentioned at the public meeting, this process is in addition to the possible planning application that may be submitted and which triggered the public meeting.
If people haven’t already submitted their views to Norfolk County Council on the bid by the landowner/operator they now have just over 3 weeks to do so. Follow the links on the NCC website.
By: Simon Wheatman on March 31, 2008
at 8:44 am
Simon is quite correct, your comments must be received by the County Council by 25th April. I will make sure every comment posted to this Blog is considered, but even so, a letter direct to the right place on the Norfolk County web site is excellent advise.
Tony
By: tonytomkinson on March 31, 2008
at 3:32 pm
Thank you everyone who has read and/or commented on this blog. The dead line for submission for the scoping issue is now passed. However, the deadline for the consultation long term plan does not expire until 25th April, so your comments are still valid.
I have passed all of the comments that are printed in the Blog to the officers who will be responding to the ‘scoping opinion request’.
But there is one further issue that I would like residents of Haddiscoe to do regarding the possibility of a later application. That is; is there a keen naturalist in Haddiscoe who might be able to monitor the wildlife using the site? This is a particularly important time with the breeding season just starting for our birds and animals, including newts and other amphibians. Your help would be appreciated.
By: tonytomkinson on April 3, 2008
at 7:32 pm
Tony, regarding the monitoring of wildlife on this site …
I am currently drawing up detailed submissions for the ecology sections of both the Mineral and Waste Site allocation Evidence Base documents (still open for consultation until April 25th). The details currently included in these documents are not only inaccurate and incomplete, but completely downplay the value of this site to wildlife. I understand from meeting the planners on their recent ‘roadshow’ that the comments are written by NCC employed consultants based on the notes submitted by the applicants and their own ‘expertise’. By the planners own admission only a sample of sites were physically visited … on which basis I do not believe that the Haddiscoe site can have been visited!
So far as birds and mammals are concerned I shall be including details of all UK and Norfolk BAP species that I have recorded both from the site and from the immeadiately adjoining marshes over the last 12 years. Just by chance I have surveyed the entire site this winter as part of the new BTO (British Trust for Ornithology) bird atlas project, and will be starting the breeding survey during April. I also have some experience of, and records for, the dragonflies, butterflies and moths found in the immeadiate area and will include relevant details of these.
Needless to say, I shall be monitoring and recording anything and everything of note at this site during the coming months. If anyone else can contribute records – particularly of insects or plants – please do!
Many thanks Chris, this will be very helpful should this application get to planning. Tony
By: Chris Allen on April 4, 2008
at 1:56 am
Having read todays Beccles & Bungay journal, which has printed a statement from Earsham Gravel, I felt the need to add another comment to this web log.
Their statement denies the site would be a landfill, however it is a FACT that NCC have highlighted this site as one of their listed waste disposal sites (if it is excavated).
If Earsham Gravels statement is true, and they really do not support domestic/industrial waste landfill, they will now remove all 3 sites from the proposed list and not allow NCC to make any of them “Preferred sites” for the waste disposal.
It is also noted that Earsham gravel chose this site and I quote from the paper “carefully chosen” to provide a supply to customers and reduce the miles travelled by lorries.
In other words they chose this site for financial reasons to reduce lorry travel (cost), not because it is the only site, or the best site, but because its in their customer base area.
This has nothing to do with the needs of gravel and sand for building in Norfolk, its to keep a supply chain going for Earsham Gravel customer base and supply area.
How good of them only to propose working 0700 to 1800 and saturday mornings, we should all be gratefull, we can relax in our gardens on a sunday and listen to the birds, the ones still left that is.
The reference to floodlighting shows they obviously havent heard of light pollution either, if their statement has any credibility, they should now consider what will happen once a big hole has been dug, if they really are against landfill , forget using Haddiscoe as a site, because with the current NCC scheme has a duty for landfill also and cannot exclude considering it.
As for grassing/maintaining the earth banks, why dont they visit one day, get out of the car, stop for one minute, stand, look and listen, maybe on a nice sunny sunday and then think about what they are proposing and how it will never be the same!
With local elections coming in May and gardening about to start in earnest, perhaps we should all be thinking of where we shall be casting our votes or from whom we buy our gravel from, it may not sway matters but small irritations are always the worst.
By: Tim Scales on April 4, 2008
at 7:05 pm
Out of interest, has anyone done the calculations into how many extra lorries there would be per day along the A143 through Haddiscoe if both the Haddiscoe pit (MIN25) and the Waveney Forest pit at Fritton (MIN38) both went ahead? Perish the thought!
Also I was surprised to see the South Norfolk Council Link magazine put through our doors last week didn’t have any mention of these proposals. Would this not have been a great opportunity/ medium for the council to use to inform all local people of the proposals in our area?
By: Claire Palmer on April 6, 2008
at 10:41 pm
How eloquent and passionate everyone has been who has written to this site. I too have lived in Haddiscoe for 31 years and loved every minute.
I cannot add any more to what people have already said but as an artist I love the vistas over the marshes and the lovely bluebell wood beside the church. Who would want to buy a painting of the view towards St. Mary’s with a gravel production plant slap bang in the middle of it?
I have sat in the field (which has now been ploughed) when it was set aside and listened to the Skylarks. I too have seen the Barn Owls hunting each side of the B 1103 and marvelled at their ghost like appearance in the dusk. Will one ever swoop over my head again to catch a bat from my roof?
Will the Marsh Harrier swoop on a Chaffinch down the Loke?
Will I hear and see the Greater Spotted Woodpecker across in the little wood opposite my house?
My garden is full of beautiful birds,Goldfinches, Green Finches, Siskins, Bluetits, Great Tits, Long Tailed Tits, Robins, Blackbirds, Thrushes and even a Jays. I fear that they will not stay around when noise and light polution threaten their habitat.
All Haddiscoe is up in arms about these proposals and we are united as was confirmed by a packed village hall last night.
WE MUST UNITE AND FIGHT.
By: Carole Kemp on April 8, 2008
at 10:17 am
Just a quick response to the point raised about the South Norfolk District Council Link magazine. This is a generic district wide magazine covering District matters (such as recycling etc.) only.
As this is a County Council consultation the County Council have mentioned it in their version of the Link magazine (Norfolk Matters/Your Norfolk).
By: WIlliam Kemp on April 10, 2008
at 11:03 am
[…] the blog to inform readers of developments from Norfolk County Council that affected his area. In March he wrote about the possibility of a gravel pit in the village of Haddiscoe. He had been to a public meeting the night before attended by over 100 people from the village. […]
By: Why leaders should blog (Part II) « Cllr 2.0 on April 14, 2008
at 4:00 pm
For over a thousand years Haddiscoe church has stood on a prominent hill-top position overlooking the marshes. Suddenly it has been decided to apply for the extraction of gravel, which would lower the terrain very considerably. This would have an adverse effect on the area designated an area of Natural Beauty, and the wildlife inhabiting it. It would have a very considerable effect, by noise, traffic and air pollution, on what has always been a small and peaceful community. Surely a more appropriate site could be found than next to a busy road junction, where a B road joins a main trunk road, and this close to the village.
By: D Willmot on April 23, 2008
at 12:56 pm
With reference to Manor Farm Haddiscoe/Earsham Gravels Limited planning permission for the extraction of sand and gravel I would like to make my opposition to this development for the following reasons.
1. Pollution of the Local Environment
What legally enforcible guantantee is there that the site will never be used for domestic, medical, or low grade chemical waste? Clearly if this were to occur the resulting consequences would be numerous and potentially hazardous to the health of the local community, many of whom would be living literally only yards from the edge of such a site.
Decomposition of organic waste leads to the production of methane and other chemicals, many known to be carcinogenic. In the long term leachate from such a site will have a direct pollutant effect on Haddiscoe Marshes – an area which is in many ways unique – and attracts many rare species of birds and wildlife. Contamination of the marshes will almost certainly be an insoluble problem and lead to ever increasing degradation of the wildlife habitat.
It is well known that sites such as these attract vermin, notably rats. I have already witnessed a rat population in recent years surrounding organic waste material on Crab Apple Lane adjacent to the proposed site. Currently the use of pharmacological agents in an attempt to control these pests has become far less dependable and in many cases ineffectual (e.g. a known and growing reistance of rats to the effects of Warfarin). On a site of 60 acres, a large and potentially uncontrollable rat population would be likely to occur. Residents living close to the site and any children straying on to it could contract Wiel’s Disease which can result in kidney and liver failure and potential death.
2. Use of Agricultural Land
The rules governing ‘set aside’ have, I understand, been recently changed, presumably to increase areas of productive agricultural land. It would seem, therefore, to be illogical to reduce the area of such land in view of future increased demand for food production.
I am informed that there are approximately 140 sites within Norfolk from which gravel may be extracted. How many of these sites are currently not used for agricultural purposes? If there are such sites available surely it would be more sensible to use them rather than the site proposed at Haddiscoe.
3. Effects on Local Roadways
The proposed site is only accessible by the B1136 which is hardly suited to cope with the type of heavy vehicles associated with, what after all is, an industrial, not agricultural, undertaking. I understand that another local firm using such vehicles does not use the A143 (Beccles to Yarmouth Road) for safely reasons. Apparently the rate of extraction from this site would require 80, 40 ton lorries per day. Any of the vehicles travelling to Great Yarmouth would have to use the A143 (Haddiscoe Dam) increasing the risk of traffic accidents on this already hazardous stretch of road, either side of which are deep dykes. Having used this road on a daily basis for fifteen years I have witnessed, on a number of occasions, accidents involving large lorries skidding off the road into dykes causing injury and prolonged disruption to traffic flow to Great Yarmouth, for up to 24 hours. With such an increased usage by heavy vehicles on this road potentially lethal accidents would become more frequent. In my capacity as a Consultant Surgeon at the James Paget Hospital in Gorleston I have personal knowledge of such accidents and have dealt with their consequences.
4. Reduction of Local Amenites
Apart from siting a busy, noisy, and essentially polluting undustrial process in a rural/agricultural/residential area there will also be the loss of a Bridle Path which runs for 300 metres through the proposed site. If permission is given for this proposal, can one assume that as a result of the degradation of the immediate environs of Haddiscoe that there would be a reassessment of Council Tax banding, to reflect the inevitable reduction in value to all surrounding properties?
5. Fly Tipping
An industrial site is bound to attract fly tipping. To underline this point, since the arrival of amenities on Crab Tree Lane, recently provided for the workforce undertaking road alterations on the B1136, fly tipping has already occured.
I trust that these comments will receive your close attention.
J. R. Sansom F.R.C.S.
Dale Farm
By: Julian and Cathy Sansom on April 24, 2008
at 8:32 pm
I think its very bad that they are putting this gravel pit right next to which is arguably one of the nicest round Saxon church’s in Norfolk, perched on a hill and can be seen for miles.
The effects of the lorries on this small village will also be very bad , there will also be lots of dust caused by gravel extraction.
I hope the comments of people on this site will put a stop to this scheme ,locals have a good slogan “stopit”
I completely agree with this slogan
By: stuart buchan on April 25, 2008
at 6:42 am
As a planning engineer for a large UK based consultancy company, I am somewhat concerned about the proposal of a gravel/mining/seperation plant at Haddiscoe.
These sites are well known for high levels of noise and light pollution due to the nature of the works and their 24hr funcionalilty.
Even the modern electric sites still remain noisey and often rely on Diesel powered generators as back ups in case of power failures (This area of Norfolk is well known for power outages/interuptions).
To have such a site this close/within a village respected for its natural environment, wildlife and geographic position overlooking the Norfolk & Suffolk broads will be looked at in many years to come as a planning disaster.
The local highways network already struggles to keep up with demand with the present traffic counts, to add additonal high volumes of HGV traffic will cause more disruption. HGV’s destined for GT Yarmouth will have to cross the ageing bridge at St Olaves which already operates a give and take system via traffic signals.
Further more, HGV’s heading towards Beccles will have to pass the Infant School at Toft Monks, causing a serious risk to children, parents and teachers.
If however, the local B1136 was used by yet more HGVs, I have major conerns about the already dangerous junction at Hales and exits to Thurlton whcih have already claimed many drivers over the years.
The burried services below the roads (namely frest water, sewage etc..) will be put under more stress from the increased HGV usage leading to an increase in burst mains/leaks etc…
This needs some serious inteligent thought if the local planners who’s responsiblity is to sanction this site do not want to go down in history for all the wrong reasons or worse, end up with blood on their hands.
Lets have a bit of thought about what we are really trying to achieve, its commercial value & impact, environmental impact and above all else peoples quality of life within the lovely villages of Norfolk and the Broads.
Im sure the Broads Authority and Environment Agency will also have much to comment on regarding the surrounding sites of special scientific interest and the impact it may have on the local wildlife.
I urge you to think again !
It takes thousands of years to form such a pretty landscape, it only takes a couple of stupid planners to ruin it for eternity.
By: Gavin Ralph on June 2, 2008
at 11:38 am
If you are interested in any further developments regarding this campaign, or would like to get involved in the communities action against these proposals, please visit the Haddiscoe StoPit Campaign Website at http://stopit.haddiscoe.info/ or go via it’s parent site for the Village itself. (www.haddiscoe.info).
Your continued support ensures we are still heard while the machinations of government continue in the background.
By: Andy Palmer on August 25, 2008
at 8:33 pm
I am considering purchasing a property in Haddisoe and am quite alarmed by what I have read about the proposals. Could anyone inform me as to what stage the application is at? Is this really likely to happen and if the residents have not been informed yet, does anyone know when they are likely to be? Is there a cut off date for this proposal? Any info would be truly welcome to inform my decision. Many thanks!
By: victoria McDicken on August 31, 2008
at 8:56 pm
Victoria,
As part of the Haddiscoe StoPit Campaign committee I understand your concern.
At this time we are awaiting a hearing date from Norfolk County Council. Once this is published we will have about 4 weeks before the proposal for this gravel extraction is considered. We are expecting the hearing to be in the beginning of the new year, or maybe as early as December this year.
The committee intend to have a strong case for opposing this proposal including expert, professional help.
You can keep up-to-date with any major changes, such as these dates, at http://stopit.haddiscoe.info/
The village is lovely by the way, I’ve lived here now for only a few years, but find the people very friendly and the views stunning…
By: Andy Palmer on October 1, 2008
at 9:26 pm
Public Notice
The first Annual General Meeting of the Haddiscoe StoPit Association is to be held at the Haddiscoe Village Hall, The Street, Haddiscoe on Monday the 6th April 2009 starting at 2030h.
StoPit has been formed to fight proposed gravel extraction, concrete making and inert waste recycling in the village.
The Annual General Meeting will be a members’ only meeting.
If you are concerned about these proposals and want your voice to be heard, join StoPit now.
The membership fee of ten pounds could save you thousands on the future value of your house.
Why not join at the meeting on the door?
By: Andy Palmer on March 7, 2009
at 12:55 pm
I have lived in Haddiscoe now for eight years, I run a boarding kennels and am extremely worried for both the village and our business, as well as our home if this proposed pit was to go ahead.It took along time to find a suitable kennel for us as we were looking for a home and a business in one.We travelled the country and it took a few years, as soon as we drove into Haddiscoe all those years ago and drove into the car park of windmill cottage kennels it felt right, the village is fantastic and my nephews absolutely love it.It is great having somewhere safe for them to play, as to some comments that have been made about the village arguing amongst itself, that is certainly not the experience I have had.Everyone I have spoken to has been against the pit, one of the meetings I attended, there was an expert who has had many dealings with this kind of situation and the health implications when it came to the amount of dust in the air, it was frightening.The other comment was also stating that the village was almost over reacting with problems that may happen.My response to that would be OF COURSE EVERYONE IS WORRIED it is no good stating your fears once the pit has got the go ahead that is like closing the door when the horse has bolted.Nobody has got a crystal ball, to see the full impact on the village but a bit of common sense has to tell you that all the points listed by everybody on this site and the village as a whole, it is not going to be good for the village, it will be extremely detrimental.The village is extremely united and you only have to see the great work that the StopIt campaign has done to see this.Individuals like Rory Kelsey and Andy Palmer to name but a few have been amazing.As the owner of the kennels I am not always able to get out and about in the village as much as I would like, as there always has to be someone on the premises and you are a bit tied, but we fully support the village and the campaign to stop the pit going ahead.
By: Helen Gough on July 13, 2012
at 1:52 pm
Thank you Helen for your comment. This proposal for gravel extraction and concrete batching plant so near to the centre of the village is wrong and I do hope the planners throw it out. There is a place for this type of activity and that is not close to a village like Haddiscoe. I am thinking of the pit neat to Norton Subcourse. The Minerals Plan approved recently and now sent for approval by Government, in my view, identified quite accuratly the right and wrong places for mineral extraction, Haddiscoe was seen as the wrong place.
This proposal is designed to get in before the County Plan takes effect, again in my view, this is sharp practice and I hope that we will persuade the Planners to refuse permission.
Thanks again for you comment, I hope many more residents will oppose and will come to County Hall to show the planners the strength of feeling of the residents.
Tony
By: tonytomkinson on July 13, 2012
at 6:37 pm
I have lived in haddiscoe for the last 6 years originally a Kessingland boy (so I am all too aware of growth in a village) and moved here from oulton broad for the village life. I have completed various DIY projects using aggregates removed from Norton pit, and can honestly say that the pit is no where near the village and indeed the lorries traverse a purpose built road across fields to achieve this.
Why should haddiscoe not be given the same consideration as to its proximity to the village.
I fly by Helicopter to the offshore platform where I work and the thing that strikes me is the enormity of the spaces between urbans areas in Norfolk. Surely there are things called maps freely available which show the open spaces I see by air and if the proposers are serious about sustaining economic growth and employment surely a modest investment in surveys is not outwith the bounds of reality for locations which are not in a village location considering the massive profits available over the predicted lifespan.
Not in my back yard is a cliche in most instances but in this case it is quite literally the truth, I walk my dogs past the forge and through the wood which is something I look forward to after being away and something that would change forever if this proposal goes ahead.
By: John Geddes on January 6, 2013
at 8:21 am