As a pleasant change from canvassing this morning Colin and I went to a meeting of the Development Committee at Babergh. The issue of the proposed gravel extraction plant at Chilton was due to be discussed. The morning proved to be very interesting, if rather protracted.
The plan to extract gravel and build associated industrial plant at the site that runs parallel with Valley Road, has been a real worry for people not only in Chilton, but also in Great Waldingfield, Great Cornard and Newton. Even those residents living some distance from the site are naturally concerned about the increased traffic flows and potential pollution that are likely to result. Of particular concern is the proposed exit road onto a notoriously dangerous stretch of the A134. A horrendous 120 lorry movements a day are expected to be generated by the site, some of which be routed through the already over-congested centre of Sudbury.
The ultimate decision maker is Suffolk County Council, but Babergh had been asked to give their opinion as a contribution to the decision making process. Representations were made by Peter Clifford, the Chairman of Chilton Parish Council, by the Clerk of Newton Parish Council and by Vince Humphries the Chairman of Great Waldingfield Parish Council. No-one said a word in favour of the enterprise.
Colin in his capacity as Ward Member was able to speak persuasively and at some length about the issue. He pointed out that he was opposed to the scheme when it was included in the County Council Minerals Plan some years ago and he has not changed his mind in the intervening period! The project’s scope has greatly expanded and in addition to gravel extraction permission is being sought for associated waste recycling and cement bagging activities. In addition development, past and future in the area, has meant that traffic levels, current and anticipated, are very much higher than they were when the plan was originally mooted. Colin urged the Committee to object to the scheme, and in the debate that followed it was clear that the Members agreed with him.
Many arguments were made against the project. However, Babergh is to object on the following grounds:
There will be an adverse impact on residential amenity due to noise, dust, traffic etc. and the visual impact of the development
There will be an adverse impact on the landscape.
Highway safety will be compromised
The ten year time limit is unrealistic.
The nature of the industrial structures would be better suited to a permanent location.
The question now goes to the County Council sometime in the summer for final decision. Colin intends to repeat the representations made today at that time. It is clear in my view that the gravel extraction project is by no means a ‘done deal’, and that there is now a real possibility that it will not go ahead.
The plan to extract gravel and build associated industrial plant at the site that runs parallel with Valley Road, has been a real worry for people not only in Chilton, but also in Great Waldingfield, Great Cornard and Newton. Even those residents living some distance from the site are naturally concerned about the increased traffic flows and potential pollution that are likely to result. Of particular concern is the proposed exit road onto a notoriously dangerous stretch of the A134. A horrendous 120 lorry movements a day are expected to be generated by the site, some of which be routed through the already over-congested centre of Sudbury.
The ultimate decision maker is Suffolk County Council, but Babergh had been asked to give their opinion as a contribution to the decision making process. Representations were made by Peter Clifford, the Chairman of Chilton Parish Council, by the Clerk of Newton Parish Council and by Vince Humphries the Chairman of Great Waldingfield Parish Council. No-one said a word in favour of the enterprise.
Colin in his capacity as Ward Member was able to speak persuasively and at some length about the issue. He pointed out that he was opposed to the scheme when it was included in the County Council Minerals Plan some years ago and he has not changed his mind in the intervening period! The project’s scope has greatly expanded and in addition to gravel extraction permission is being sought for associated waste recycling and cement bagging activities. In addition development, past and future in the area, has meant that traffic levels, current and anticipated, are very much higher than they were when the plan was originally mooted. Colin urged the Committee to object to the scheme, and in the debate that followed it was clear that the Members agreed with him.
Many arguments were made against the project. However, Babergh is to object on the following grounds:
There will be an adverse impact on residential amenity due to noise, dust, traffic etc. and the visual impact of the development
There will be an adverse impact on the landscape.
Highway safety will be compromised
The ten year time limit is unrealistic.
The nature of the industrial structures would be better suited to a permanent location.
The question now goes to the County Council sometime in the summer for final decision. Colin intends to repeat the representations made today at that time. It is clear in my view that the gravel extraction project is by no means a ‘done deal’, and that there is now a real possibility that it will not go ahead.
