Despite the fact that almost 16,000 people have signed the petition against Banks' plans, only 39 direct objections have been lodged with Newcastle City Council.

Individual objections carry more weight than a petition.

We cannot emphasise enough the importance of objecting directly to the council.

It would appear letters of support have been actively encouraged, and they now outweigh the number of objections. 

The Secretary of State will “call-in” a planning application for his own determination in certain circumstances - if it conflicts with national policies on important matters or would give rise to substantial cross-boundary or national controversy.

Thousands of individual objections will demonstrate the controversy surrounding this application. 

You can login/register to submit comments here: https://bit.ly/2UzO8Ji

Alternatively you can email david.grimshaw@newcastle.gov.uk, with a copy to planning.control@newcastle.gov.uk, quoting planning application 2019/0300/01/DET.

Please see below for points you may wish to include in your objection.

• The plans contravene  local and national policies on climate change, green infrastructure, Green Belt, landscape character, health and wellbeing, and biodiversity.
• The National Planning Policy Framework states, at Paragraph 211, that planning permission should not be granted for the extraction of coal where the proposal is not environmentally acceptable.
• There are no national, local or community benefits to outweigh the harmful impacts and the applicant's proposed 'restoration first' proposals are inadequate.
• Mining operations would have a significant adverse effect of residential amenity and result in noise, dust and disruption, contrary to Core Strategy and Urban Core Plan (CSUCP) Policy CS14.
• A huge opencast coal mine would contravene local and national targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, contrary to CSUCP Policy CS16.
• The proposal would damage a wildlife corridor and would result in the loss of 23 individual trees, as well of 11 groups of trees and 26 hedgerows. It would also severely harm priority habitats and species (including several bat and bird species, Brown Hare, Badger) contrary to CSUCP Policy CS18 and UDP Policy NC1.1, NC1.5 and NC1.7.
• The proposals would result in loss of and temporary diversion of public rights of way, contrary to Policy CSUCP CS18 and UDP Policy OS2.
• The proposals would harm the Landscape character of the area and that of Throckley Dene, which is a highly sensitive area of ancient semi-natural woodland, contrary to CSUCP Policy CS1 and UDP Policy EN3 and EN3.1
• The Dewley Burn will be adversely affected by runoff from this development, contrary to UDP Policy EN4, which aims to protect river settings.
• This proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt and would harm openness and the purposes of including the land within the Green Belt, contrary to NPPF Paragraphs 145 and 146 and CSUCP Policy CS19. There are no very special circumstances to outweigh Green Belt harm.

Thank you for your support.