The list is published and Rayne is on it.
Unfortunately this is not the list of invites to a high society banquet or the guest list to a star studded night club, but the list of sites to be
turned into a gravel pit. The official document can be found HERE
and we have just a few weeks to send in our objections. It is possible if you register with the web site to enter your objections directly
while reading the document or you can email your objections to firstname.lastname@example.org
. The document is not easy reading but please
be do try, also objections need to be written in a way where they object to the way the conclusions in the document were reached not about the
A pdf version of the document is HERE
Contact at Essex County Council: Rebecca Rushmer in the Minerals Planning Team: 01245 437523 email: email@example.com
for the availability of documents off-line.
A CD of all documents including the main document and summary is available at the Rayne CIP office
printed copies of summary and main document and CD of all documentsare available at the Braintree library and Braintree Council Offices the CD can also be viewed at these locations
They can also be view by appointment at County Hall: contact Rebecca Rushmer (details as above)
NB Deadline for comments Thursday (5pm) 28th February.
Every comment on the document does help so please persevere and enter your comments. If you need help filling in the comments please contact me on
Here are some suggestions on things you may like to comment about
Fairness and Soundness Issues
1. The MLP is lengthy, technical and complex and is beyond the funding means and expertise of a small rural Parish Council to review adequately on behalf of residents. - fairness
2. The process to deliver the MLP has not been followed as prescribed - relation to legal framework and dependent plans - soundness.
3. The plan requirement for aggregates is overstated - soundness.
4. The effect of the overstatement of requirement is to allow two new large sites to be included in preferred site list - both of these proposed by Lafarge whose presence in Essex would otherwise diminish greatly. - soundness.
5. There are inconsistencies against selection criteria in choosing which of the non red flag sites are put forward into the preferred site list.
6. There is insufficient weighting to the local social impact - Rayne Village is outside of the 250m zone and is not mentioned in any of the assessment criteria nor is the proximity of Rayne Primary School - soundness.
7. The western weighting which was considered unfair and was withdrawn has been continued in effect by the recent inclusion of another category covering Transport Policy - fairness.
8. There is a continuing bias to locating sites in Braintree District following many years of extraction activity in the district and despite acknowledgement of the need to move extraction to other districts - fairness.
9. The restoration of the Broadfields site is not adequately addressed - there is some confusion about whether the site is in the Stansted Safeguard Zone and therefore whether water restoration is allowable - soundness.
General Issues ( more relevant to Planning Approval Stage )
P1. Dust and air pollution
P2. Traffic controls - times of day and routes
P3. Days and Times of operation of site
P6. Sensitive Sites - local woodlands
P7. Restoration commitments
P8. Noise levels