Opponents threaten a second legal challenge after the council delayed a quarry decision, citing traffic, landscape concerns.

Objectors mentioned another legal challenge option at the meeting, expressing their concerns about traffic and landscape impact. These concerns mirror their past issues. Councilors chose to delay the quarry decision to allow time for another consultation.
David Busby said the quarry would ruin quiet living, anticipating many trucks using small roads. He feared trucks endangering kids and cyclists. Cristopher Hudson called the plans “environmental vandalism.” Some felt late papers needed more review time, leading some to think the council should do another consultation round.
The council said they did not have to do this; however, Tom Hill said a fair chance is vital. Adrian Ward said people feel shut out and saw the consultation lack as ‘reprehensible’. Neil Ward defended the quarry application stating planners worked to limit harm to reasonable levels.
Ward said objectors focus only on their interests while planners must consider all sides of the issues. He explained they viewed this as the best location for the quarry because other spots would not work well and those sites would also be more visible.
Updated traffic numbers show 230 more daily trips. The company would give £20,000 for traffic fixes. These fixes impact certain roads and trucks should avoid some routes legally, violating the rules would result in actions. Councilors delayed it despite staff backing it. The quarry decision happens April 24.