The Scruton Quarry Group fully accept it is a fundamental right of any landowner to submit parcels of land for proposals of this nature, with a view to maximising the value of assets held. But protecting asset value is not the sole perogative of wealthy landowners. The same principle applies to people from all walks of life no matter how great or small the value of
If this project goes ahead, then any enhancement of asset value enjoyed by the landowners will be gained at the direct expense of all the people living in and around Scruton who will see the value of their own assets fall drastically.
The main effect will be the fall in house prices. Absolutely no one wants to live in, or at the edge of a quarry or in some cases be surrounded by one. Local residents fear that their houses, in many cases their most valuable single asset, will become completely unsellable and therefore worthless. It is an outcome too bleak to contemplate and one very compelling reason to object.
There is another asset which will be severely harmed, albeit an intangible one – the quality of life enjoyed by residents.
The area will become an eyesore. All woods and trees will be removed allowing dust, grit & noise to be carried right into Scruton village on the prevailing westerly wind. This would be further exacerbated by the removal of the ridge west of the area.
It is also appropriate to consider what the area will look like after it has been quarried out. Promises will no doubt be made to ensure effective landscaping but this will take years possible decades to reinstate the area to the levels of maturity we currently have.
It is questionable whether there is a will to carry out such a reinstatement or just to fall back on extending the industrial estate over the area. The area would then be ruined forever.
In the opinion of the action group this page provides very good reasons why everyone should see it as their personal duty to object to the scheme proposed
Individually and collectively the members of our group do not have the knowledge to challenge or dispute the Council’s assessment of mineral needs and therefore completely accept that assessment.
What we do know is that there will be other sites capable of supplying those needs, the development of which will inflict far less damage and harm on many, many fewer people.