Image description

CHURNET VALLEY CONSERVATION SOCIETY

                       protecting and conserving this natural area of outstanding beauty  

                                                        

Follow us:

News Flash

 

1). We now have until 31th December 2019 to show our objection to this new application SMD/2019/0646 by Laver Leisure for the large Holiday Park Development at Moneystone, in the heart of the Churnet Valley.


No matter if you have objected to the previous applications you need to send in our objections AGAIN (yes !!!) because their previous application was for outline permission only and so they have applied again, this time to gain the full planning permission necessary to start construction..

You will need to do 3 things:

 

1.      Read the document set out below which summarises the Issues regarding the development. Select from the document the topic(s) those you wish to comment on and to make more impact add your words and comments wherever you can.

2.       Send in your objection to Jane Curley, the Planning Officer in charge of getting the Laver application through the Planning Application Committee (PAC). The reference for the application is:  SMD/2019/0646. You can send your objection in by clicking on this link and filling in the form online. Planning Applications - Staffordshire Moorlands District Council
http://publicaccess.staffsmoorlands.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=131319
Additionally if you sent objections to the previous application you might also like to copy and paste this into the objection box online:

 

1. As someone who wrote objecting to SMD/2014/0682 and /or SMD/2016/0378 and noting that SMD/2019/0646 is put forward as a resubmission of 0682 and also reliant on 0378 I require that my earlier objections be brought forward in full to be considered in SMD/2019/0646.


2. The 0646/0682/0378 applications did not and does not comply with the policies of the SMDC Core Strategy or the policies of the Churnet Valley Master plan.

 

3.      Send in your objections to all the individual Councillors.


Why? because none of your objections or your reasons for them will be given to the Councillors. The Officer Jane Curley will simply note the number of responses summarise the issues and provide her counter arguments in her report for PAC members to read. This tactic has worked in the past as Councillors become more aware of the public's (voters) concerns and more informed of the issues you raise.
If we want to help the Councillors to understand the grave nature of the impact of this planning application, we need to make the arguments directly to them. You can do this by cutting and pasting the following email addresses into your address bar with the SUBJECT being OBJECTIONS TO MONEYSTONE PARK DEVELOPMENT SMD/2019/0646


paul.roberts@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukben.emery@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukbill.cawley@staffsmoorlands.gov.uksue.coleman@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukjim.davies@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukkeith.flunder@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukmike.gledhill@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukkeith.hoptroff@staffsmoorlands.gov.uk; alan.hulme@staffsmoorlands.gov.uklinda.lea@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukteresa.riley@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukian.whitehouse@staffsmoorlands.gov.ukpeter.wilkinson@staffsmoorlandstony.holmes@staffsmoorlands.gov.uk

 

 


 

Of course you can address each Councillor individually in each email should you wish !! Alternatively, you can also post the objection addressed to each Councillor to the Council Offices in Leek: Councillor X, SMDC, Moorlands House, Stockwell St, Leek, Staffs, ST13 6HQ

 

Each letter must be INDIVIDUAL to be counted. So in a household each person should send their own objection to increase objection count. A single letter with 100 signatures only counts as '1'.

 

Here is a sample template for an idea, but please express your views in your own words:


 

Your Address


 

Dear Councillor,


I would like to tell you why I am registering an objection to planning application SMD/2019/0646 for developing the closed quarry at Moneystone in the Churnet Valley.

This application was originally rejected by your committee in 2014 but inexplicably with no significant alteration it was passed in 2016.

I would like you to seriously review and reconsider the inclusions in the reserved matters planning application as the following issues concern us as residents of this Valley:

1.    The traffic ___________(in  your own words perhaps using the summary attachment)

2.    The Environment and its impact ____________(in your own words)

3.    Unnecessary Development __________(in  your own words)

 

Why damage this beautiful tranquil Churnet Valley with this unnecessary development?


Why damage the prospect of this valley being granted AONB status, particularly when it is the declared wish of the Staffordshire Moorlands Council itself?

I ask you to review and reconsider the application in the light of the above points raised.


Yours Sincerely,


Fred(a) Bloggs


Your Address

 


 

Minutes of the Joint Public Meeting between members of Whiston Action Group (WAG) and the Churnet Valley Conservation Society (CVCS) 

held at Whiston Village Hall on Wednesday 4th December 2019

Commencing 7.30 pm 

 

Attendees   Councillor David Fowler (Kingsley Parish), Dot Merry, Sue Warburton, Kevin Warburton, John Higgins, Annette Baxter, Paul Housiaux, Councillor John Harrison (Cotton Parish) Tom Forester, Councillor John Williams (Ipstones  Parish), David Robinson-Smith, Phil Hall, James Sells, Gerry Bailey, James Wilson, Peter Cowie, David Walters, Sheila Steele, John Steele, Jarrod Ford,  Sally Marjoram and Councillor John Steele (Kingsley Parish) who acted as the Chair for the purposes of the meeting. (Note: Not all attendees left their details for the purpose of these records)

 

Apologies   received from Nick Cresswell, Keith Bennett, Gill Smallwood and Claire Skitt.      

 

 

As it was a joint meeting of the two groups, the Chair of CVCS, JS invited all those attending to introduce themselves. He then outlined the purpose of the meeting to update everyone on the latest developments with regard to the planning application SMD/2019/0646, which was for the reserved matters, now being brought forward for consideration by SMDC’s planning application committee (PAC).

 

He reminded everyone that this was an additional application arising from the earlier outline permission granted in 2016 under SMD/2016/0378 and emphasised the importance of making fresh representations on the new documents within SMDC’s SMD/2019/0646 webpage.

 

He explained how everyone should examine the documents and raise any matters of concern relating to the  means of access , appearance, scale , layout, and landscaping with regard to the whole of the Phase 1 details and how to contact or make their views known to the Case Officer, Mrs Jane Curley at SMDC in Leek. She will be the person will eventually produce a report upon the proposals to be put before the District Councillors of the PAC once the consultation period has elapsed.

 

JS stressed the importance of the number of individual letters or emails being sent into SMDC and urged everyone to get as many friends, relatives and acquaintances to do likewise in order to boost the totals being received in Leek by Wednesday 12th December. He also explained the system allowed each person to make more than one representation provided that it was on another aspect of the planning issues and that there were allowances usually made for late letters to be considered at the discretion of SMDC planning officers almost up to the day of the hearing which will be in the early part of next  year.

 

The best methods of how to lobby councillors, which had proved to be a good tactic in the past and had successfully overturned some decisions that had been recommended by the case officer to be approved, were then aired.

 

Mr Housiaux (PH) then explained that the most likely causes for such a reversal of decisions lay in certain areas upon which everyone should concentrate their criticisms, but stressed the need for a fighting fund in order to use professional expertise or possibly at some later stage 

legal advice if required to strengthen their objections.

 As an example of this he cited the use of expert traffic reports of the sort that had been commissioned by him in the past on behalf of WAG, but as that would need updating it would come at a cost. It was agreed by everyone to support this endeavour by launching a fund-raising scheme commencing with the sale of Christmas cards, Calendars, the WAG 200 club membership and /or volunteer donations using a standing order, or by gift.

 

The details of the fund-raising scheme were then explained by Jarrod Ford who together with Sally Marjoram had done much work to prepare it in advance of the meeting and for which the Chair expressed his gratitude. The audience were very appreciative, and the fund was immediately boosted by sales at the end of the meeting.

 

Discussions were then opened to the floor with various questions and answers being addressed on matters such as publicity; inviting the PAC to familiarise themselves with the area; AONB; the validity or otherwise of the no right hand turn exit proposal being recommended by the applicants as a way of ameliorating traffic flows into Oakamoor and directing all traffic down Eaves lane towards Whiston; issues with road safety and the actual refusal of the full application for such SMD/2016/0388  which appeared to negate it; the pressure on the local infrastructure as a result of increased long term residential use of the lodges now up to 40% but with no actual defined private ownership limit; the design of the lodges themselves, new plans for the hub buildings; Sat nav issues and lack of alternative forms of transport with John Higgins giving the latest update on the local bus services no longer in use; landscape engineering and the dumping of materials during the process of draining the lake in quarry 3 and then establishing the revised water levels for the park; 

air borne pollution and disturbance from engineering and construction works: Frame Wood and the ecological threat to flora and fauna; increasing number of visitors as this is only phase 1 of the plans, noise and light pollution from the 24/7 lighting of the site and its negative impact upon wildlife and the prospects of AONB status for the valley; the uncertainty of the nature of imported engineering materials (inert waste) as landfill needed for re-profiling the quarry sides; the dubious practice that had already taken place when Laver obtained outline permission when toxic waste was identified in the matrix of materials being dumped onsite; the pollution from increased car usage contributing to global warming and the change of emphasis and attitude in the general public to the risks of increasing levels of nitrates and other dust particles contributing to global warming and climate change; the irony of SMDC trying to encourage less car usage and promote its carbon free policy and emergency action plan that it announced recently while allowing a huge development that would depend upon a huge increase in car usage to access it and that has been boasted about by Peter Swallow 'as going to be bigger than Alton Towers!’

     

The meeting concluded with rapid and generous sales of the cards and calendars which can be ordered from Jarrod Ford and also from whom details of how to join the WAG 200 club can be obtained.

 

 As you can see from the minutes there is an urgent need to raise funds to pay for expert advice and possibly legal advice at some point in the future in order to defeat the latest planning application by Laver Leisure. CVCS and WAG have had some Photo Calendars printed showing views of the Churnet Valley as well a selection of Photo Christmas Cards printed. These are available for members to purchase. Any profits being distributed equally to CVCS and WAG.

 

Both items can be purchased form Jarrod Ford by emailing your requirements to jarroddford@hotmail.com who will then let you know how payments can be made.

 

Calendars are £10 each and a pack of 10 Christmas cards (4 exclusive designs) are also available at £10.

 

WAG are also asking their members to join a 200 Club which pays out 50% of club income each month and for direct donations. Although CVCS aren't in the position of instigating a 200 Club at present, members can apply to join the WAG 200 Club. 

 

Bullet Point Topics for Letters to SMDC regarding SMD/2019/0646

TRAFFIC ISSUES

TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH MONEYSTONE PARK

The Valley is looking at daily totals of 1136 – 1253 vehicles moving along these unsuitable, steep, narrow country lanes resulting for 190 lodges proposed.

40% of these lodges are being sold to Permanent Residents

60% are intended to accommodate Holiday Visitors.

SOURCES:

Lodge Occupancy and consequent Vehicle Numbers: Christie and Co were used as the informed source for occupancy information for all Moneystone applications to build the proposed holiday park. They quote an average of 67% fill throughout the year with a 96% maximum occupancy at the peak periods of the various school holidays. Other informed sources have stated the industry average for such holiday parks as that proposed for Moneystone is 85% whilst Centre Parcs has an average of 97% all year – a figure taken from a holiday industry monitoring website. This equates to the following vehicle 2 way trips each day extrapolated from SMD/2014/0682/SMD/2016/0378 Christie & Co figures, and are for both Peak Saturdays and Peak Sundays when 50% of all lodges will change-over each day, with there being no change-overs mid-week.

Two way trips                                      85% average fill          97% maximum fill

  1. 1.      Holidaying Visitors (60%)                          114                              171
  2. 2.      Permanent Residents (40%)                     100                              150
  3. 3.      Offsite visits by 1 & 2 (Estimate*)                          72                                82
  4. 4.      Staff (as per SMD/2014/0682)                 500                              500
  5. 5.      Day Visitors                                               340                              340
  6. 6.      Services Estimated)                                    10                                10
  7. 7.      Totals                                                      1136                            1253
  • * The estimated figure for offsite visits equates to one return trip to Alton Tower and one ‘evening out’ trip for 1/7th of the visitors.

These figures make few assumptions (see items 3, 6 and 10). Item 4 is taken from SMD/2014/0682 as no figure could be found for a reduction in staff numbers resultant from there being only 190 lodges to be built on Phase 1. All other figures are from professional information sources including those from Christie and Co which can be found in both SMD/2014/0682 and SMD/2016/0378.

 

DANGEROUS ROADS:

The roads leading to and from this proposed park are narrow, steep (in the descent through Oakamoor it is 15%)and have many tight, blind bends and crests making travel around the area much more hazardous for residents, tourists, day, staff, walkers, cyclists, horse riders and all commercial and agricultural road users due to the great increase in the total number of road users generated by Moneystone Park.

DANGEROUS ROAD JUNCTIONS:

The A52 junction with Whiston Eaves Lane is at the bottom of two downward slopes of the A52 – the approach from the west being off a tight bend. The annual growth of roadside vegetation combined with the hills and bend make this a very dangerous junction to navigate.

The road junctions within the village of Oakamoor with the B5417 road to Cheadle and Cotton, and onward towards Leek are a hazard:

  • Residents and visitors to the Village Hall and the Cricketers Pub park along Carr Bank right up to the junction, leaving a very narrow space, just a single car’s width, to enter and exit onto the B5417.
  • Even with the low numbers of vehicles at the moment lines of cars can be backed up along the B5417 trying to turn into the village as well as being backed up along Carr Bank within Oakamoor itself. This road through the village also has a very narrow bridge forming another pinch point for two way traffic.

OAKAMOOR VILLAGE SAFETY

A Primary and a Pre-School is situated in the small village of Oakamoor. This application with its increased traffic volume is a danger to the children who walk to their houses, to their parents’ cars and around the village to the local churches and across this road to the Village Hall.

The senior citizens as well as villagers use these roads to walk for healthy exercise and to walk their dogs and such large numbers of vehicles are a danger to them and their way of life is going to change considerably if this application is allowed.

WHISTON VILLAGE SAFETY

There are few footpaths within the village of Whiston, there being just a few very short sections along the intended main route to Moneystone Park. Pedestrians going to the children’s play and/or the village hall will need to walk on the carriageway for the greatest majority of the way, thus placing their lives in jeopardy form the huge increase in vehicular traffic using Whiston Eaves Lane to access Monestone Park.

ACCIDENTS:

There are an especially large number of roll-back incidents on Whiston Bank, most of which being resolved without recourse to police attendance. There have also been brake failures on HGC’s, one resulting in the death of the lorry driver and the near death of another HGC driver after coming down Kingsley Bank and crashing into the River Churnet.

Sat Navs send traffic up and down Farley Road, Oakamoor where 52 incidents and accidents are recorded in a dossier with the County Council. This a road that is particular hazardous to navigate as it is favourite short cut for Alton Towers traffic despite the tight bends and steep grades – and the numbers of accidents!

DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC ALONG NARROW ROADS

The proposal by Laver Leisure was to put up signs to direct traffic from the proposed park uphill through the village Whiston to the A52, however, fortunately PAC Councillors saw the impracticality and unenforceability of this as:

  • the local traffic will be using this road in both directions
  • It is a public highway and people have a right to turn down into Oakamoor and the hamlet of Moneystone.
  • Sat Navs all direct traffic out of the park down the hazardous lanes into Oakamoor and up the hazardous lane of Farley Road as the preferred route into the Valley, to Cheadle, towards the M1 via Denstone, Alton and Uttoxeter.
  • Alton Towers is just 3.8 miles and 10 minutes away from this park, via Oakamoor.

To quote SMDC’s own refusal notice “1. The proposal in isolation would be likely to lead to unsafe manoeuvres on the public highway and be likely to worsen highway safety in the locality contrary to policies DC1 – Design Considerations and T1 - Development and Sustainable Transport of the Staffordshire           Moorlands Core Strategy”

However, inexplicably, and in contradiction to its other related refused decision, the PAC allowed this self-, ridiculous No Right Turn proposal to be granted within the SMD/2016/0378 outline planning permission.

ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES

 

This has not been properly considered and these Services have not been consulted as to the safety of the location and its access. They have not had a voice regarding the development of the former quarry with its inherent groundwork difficulties, its location off narrow, dangerous roads and the large numbers of people being present there on a permanent and semi-permanent basis.

 

The site will have people with medical needs in occupation. There will also be accidents to be responded to, relating both to the dangers of the narrow, steep roads leading into the Park with the large volume of vehicles being released onto them on a daily basis, as well as accidents relating to the Park facilities themselves:

 

In the refusal hearing in 2014 Councillors were anxious about the proximity of lodge frontages to the water's edge, especially for families with young children.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

 

AIR POLLUTION(PM10 - PM2.5), Nitrous Oxide (NO) and other vehicular pollutants:  Air can be contaminated by a range of very different particles such as dust, pollen, soot, smoke, and liquid droplets. Many of them can harm our health, especially very small particles that can enter deep into the lungs, such as those generated by vehicular exhausts and from rubber waste caused by tyre wear.

Airborne pollution can also hang around in the valley exposing not only residents, but holiday makers and staff to increased level of pollutant absorption.

OAKAMOOR CONSERVATION AREA: AIR QUALITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Oakamoor is a Conservation Area. 

  • It should be protected from this level of traffic and pollution.
  • No impact study has been undertaken on the effects of increased traffic on Oakamoor Conservation Area.

 

It is situated at the bottom of a steep valley. and is vulnerable to emissions pollution and poor air quality being trapped in the village, particularly with the traffic jams which will be inevitable with the narrow pinch points along the roads through the village.

 

HABITATS, ANCIENT WOODLANDS AND SPECIES

 

Outlooks on Environmental Pollution and Protection have advanced in the decade since the quarry at Moneystone was active.

 

It should be remembered that this quarry was given permission to work on the condition that it was returned back to nature when quarrying ceased.

 

Wildlife has re-established itself since cessation and because there has been inadequate monitoring of the site since the 2014 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), a new one is urgently required. The original Environmental Impact Assessment was heavily criticised by the County Council in 2016.

There is no evidence of the shortcomings identified within the EIA by the County Ecologist being properly addressed.

ANCIENT WOODLAND

The ancient woodland of Frame Wood is vulnerable to damage from users of the cycleways proposed, as it cannot be guaranteed that cyclists will always remain on their designated paths.

The Woodland Trust has listed Frame Wood, a particularly sensitive and vulnerable area within the site, on their Ancient Woodland records. It is very concerned and opposed to the plans for developing a woodland cycle track by covering the areas around the trees with protective blankets. They state that “any disturbance to the root base of the ancient trees and the immediately adjacent support biosystems that have helped establish and nurture its unique ecology for centuries, should be avoided”.

 

There is concern around permission for mountain bikers in this habitat. Evidence for recent erosion and damage to ground surfaces caused by the increase usage by bikes in wooded hillsides elsewhere in the lower Churnet Valley is now becoming more apparent as overuse of newly created routes continues.

 

No valid Environmental Impact Assessment has taken place in relation to this Planning Application.

 

NOISE POLLUTION

 

Noise resulting from this very large man-made construction, the living accommodation of 190 – 250 lodges, the attending vehicles, the day and night leisure facilities that are to be offered to visitors and park residents will detract severely from the quality of the peaceful natural habitat of the Churnet Valley.

 

The noise will also affect neighbouring residents of farms and houses as well as those visitors who come here to enjoy the peace and calm of the valley’s natural environment.

 

All residents in the surrounding area can remember the disturbing reverberating noise from 24/7 plant machinery of the quarry which was granted temporary rights to quarry a rare silica for national need.

 

The valley and its residents have a right to have this quarry restored without man-made interference in its tranquil future, according to the original agreement with the County Council.

 

LIGHT POLLUTION:

In these days of preserving the night sky, and rare nocturnal habitats, it is concerning that this development should be considered let alone being considered as appropriate in this area of outstanding natural beauty, an impending AONB.

 

Lights from the 190 – 250 lodges themselves, parking areas, internal paths and access roads, large hub and other buildings hosting a concentration of facilities will be seen from miles away and affect the nocturnal habitats in this recognised area of outstanding natural habitat.

 

LITTER:

It cannot be guaranteed that people will keep all their rubbish in their vehicles as they travel around the valley. AltonTowers visitors are regularly see throwing rubbish out of their moving cars as they drive along local country lanes.

The nation is aware of the impact of this rubbish, tins, plastics, unrecyclable material on small animals and reptiles.

Staffordshire Moorlands District Councillors should be protecting their highly valuable nature areas, in keeping with their own policies on the Environment.

COUNCIL POLICY ON ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT

 

The Council’s own policy on the Environment should focus on this issue as being one of the greatest importance to its own part in the growing national and governmental commitment to improving impact on the Environment and on Climate Change.

 

This Valley is a microcosm of that need to take measures to protect our natural habitats, in particular this one of outstanding natural beauty and future AONB  - an application for which status is supported by the Council itself.

 

VISUAL IMPACT:  DESTRUCTION OF VIEWS OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY

 

The proposals for this development, with its lodges clustering very close to the clearly visible banks of panels of its solar farm aesthetically interferes with the whole spirit and nature of this uniquely beautiful, natural Churnet Valley.

 

The listed buildings nearby overlook the site and nothing short of building bunds to restrict views of the surrounding natural area would disguise this large settlement.

 

It should be noted that in this new application the site layout is even more crammed than originally accepted in the SMD/2016/0378 grant.

 

INAPPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

The whole design of the hub, lodges and ancillary buildings is not in any traditional local style or materials and therefore visually destroys the area.

 

SITE SAFETY CONCERNS

 

Drainage and Flooding risk

 

The problematic nature of the ground under the area to be developed is a concern given climactic change and greater storm flooding risks. The loss of natural drainage with the increase in hard surfaces or impermeable ground such as with the Hub building, parking lots for visitors and staff, the hard standings outside the Lodges, the new internal roads, drives, and paths has not been studied and is a risk.

 

It is not clear what flood prevention measures there are in the quarries with so many lodges being erected below the original water level. What are the spillway capacities, given the pattern of flash flooding of recent years caused by global warming?

 

There are other major water safety concerns too, as we are constantly told to keep out of flooded quarries because of cold water risks

 

CONSTRUCTION CONCERNS

 

Rock Wall Safety and Lodge foundations

 

Suitability of sandstone: Is the sandstone strong and stable enough to support lodges built on a combination of Gabions and poles/pillars (what is the construction of both items?)

 

Suitability of gradients (slopes): The angle of the slopes in the cross-sections is steep and site plans show no safety fencing to prevent people falling/rolling into the lake. There are no safety measures shown to prevent vehicles descending the slopes onto lower level lodges or into the lake should control of vehicles be compromised.

 

THIS IS AN UNNECESSARY DEVELOPMENT. WHY?

THE VALLEY HAS THESE FACILITIES ALREADY:

  • Alton Towers already supplies the thrills and adventures, the accommodation with hotels, chalets, pods, lodges, a 4D cinema, food and drink facilities, climbing areas, spa and water park etc on the other side of this beautiful valley, just 3.8 miles and 10 minutes drive away. Why spoil a nature playground such as the Churnet Valley to create a superfluous man-made disturbance right in the heart of its beauty and tranquillity?
  • Alton Towers also has improved access from motorways and major roads with the A50 Uttoxeter to Alton Growth Improvement scheme.
  • The argument for increased accommodation in the valley is now an outmoded one as there is more than sufficient currently being supplied.

 

THERE ARE NUMBERS OF LOCAL BUSINESSES TO SUPPORT TO THRIVE:

Locally there are already many leisure facilities and small food and services businesses for residents and visitors:

  • Cheadle and Leek have leisure centres with parks, gyms, swimming pools and classes as does Uttoxeter where there is also a bowling alley and cinema.
  • Whiston village hall has its own climbing wall. 
  • Alton, Denstone, Ipstones and Waterhouses all have local shops.
  • Local small food businesses in the Valley and surrounds such as cafes, tearooms, local pubs, restaurants, e.g.
    • Denstone has a farm shop and a number of small businesses providing a variety of services and shopping experiences
    • Winkhill’s Country Cottage restaurant and shop

 

  • Local small businesses supplying accommodation: B & Bs, family run hotels, guesthouses, chalets, self-catering holiday and farm lets which need to be supported to continue to sustain the families of the Staffordshire Moorland and the Churnet Valley.

 

None of these businesses will be benefitting from the Laver Leisure as the promised in-house establishments profit /revenues will be kept onsite.

 

This will not enrich or benefit the wider local communities

 

The Council supports Totally Locally and this large scale Laver Leisure development of accommodation and facilities is in contradiction of its own ethics of supporting the local economy.

 

COUNCIL POLICY ON SUSTAINABILITY

 

In accordance with the Council definitions of unsustainability, as written into the Core Strategy and the Churnet Valley Masterplan for SMDC, this whole project is unsustainable. This proposed development is solely reliant on vehicle usage for access to sustain the visitor numbers required to make the enterprise economically viable and in turn requires a greater number of long-term residential lodges to be privately owned.

 

There is no alternative transport such as buses available, and those would be an impractical form of transport for those 60% coming to stay at the Lodges, or for the 40% living permanently there, as they would still need to take their vehicles to their Lodges, not diminishing the number of vehicles entering and exiting the proposed Park. Similarly, the lack of public transport would result in day visitors having to use their cars to make use of the sites facilities. Also, the private lodge owners of Moneystone Park who might well chose to live there permanently or semi-permanently, would need their cars to access services in neighbouring towns, as well as possibly for work and social activities outside the site on a daily basis.

 

Another reason that this is not sustainable tourism is the potential size of a semi-permanent population in the Moneystone Park settlement:

 

  • This population will be far larger than the two traditional villages of Oakamoor and Whiston combined.

 

  • The size and layout of the 190-250 lodges is such that it alters the traditional character of the surrounding area outside the site.

 

  • Such an increased population will bring pressure on the neighbouring infrastructure in terms of resources such as health clinics etc. This is an impact that has not been considered.

 

AREA OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY

 

The recent ‘final report’ of DFRA’s Landscape Review published in September 2019 by Julian Glover on behalf of Michael Gove, ex Secretary of State for the Environment , informed us that the Churnet Valley is one of only 3 of the many possible areas being considered for Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) status. It has been specifically mentioned as having “made persuasive cases to us that deserve further consideration”.

It is to be remembered here that the quarrying company was granted permission to quarry at Moneystone on the condition that it was returned back to nature at the end of its working. We would request the Councillors to honour that in the spirit and in the act and protect the Valley and its opportunity to become an AONB.

To grant permission a development of this nature and scale will threaten the prospects of the Churnet Valley achieving this highly coveted status as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which is second only to a National Park designation. The location of Alton Towers on the other side of the valley together with this Laver Leisure proposed development and the extensive traffic, noise and light pollution will destroy the natural features of this beautiful Valley which has already received unofficial recognition to the degree that it has been included for consideration as an AONB.

AONB status

  • will protect the Churnet Valley and its unique landscape for the future and importantly for the Council.
  • will be a strong support to the promotion of tourism to the Staffordshire Moorlands area.
  • will bring in wider economic prosperity than that proposed by Laver Leisure.
  • has the potential to develop the surrounding villages and towns further as tourist locations providing strong income and population support as the number of small businesses increase

 

As a resident of the area and as a Churnet Valley Conservation Society member committed to the conservation of this wonderful area of outstanding natural features and a bright future as an AONB we urge the Council to seriously consider the issues outlined above and review what is appropriate development for the Churnet Valley.



Latest news via Twitter

Image description
  • No results

Who Are We?

Churnet Valley Conservation Society dates back to the early 1980s and is a recognised stakeholder by Staffordshire Moorlands District Council.  We are concerned with the whole of the Churnet Valley and wish to represent the interests of local inhabitants, human and wildlife. Join our growing membership so that our collective voice is even louder. Please help us in "keeping an eye on the valley" to protect it from undesirable development.



                                                                                      learn more       join us       contact us

Image description
Image description

Our Vision 

 The valley must be an excellent rural living environment which also attracts countryside visitors to enjoy the pleasures of the landscape and appreciate the fascination of its industrial heritage. We do not expect the valley to be frozen in time, it must evolve in line with modern living but at the same time preserve the tranquility of this unique area. Many projects and developments will be proposed on both a large and small scale, all of these must support our vision. We hope that future generations will look back at what is decided now and thank us for the care and effort involved in sustaining and evolving this part of North Staffordshire.