Jacqui Smith opposing Chimney
Development at Astwood Bank Incinerator. 28
June 2004.
For immediate
release
Jacqui
Smith MP will be submitting an objection to the development of a
new chimney at Popes Lane in Astwood
Bank. The Committee will be considering its
response to the application that is to be formally considered in an
Appeal Hearing later in the year.
Jacqui’s
contention is that the chimney is too large, has a significant
visual impact, forms part of a creeping industrialisation of the
site and will cause access problems for Astwood
Bank First
School.
Submission to Planning
Committee29 June 2004Incinerator Chimney at
Popes
Lane
On 27
January 2004 I lodged an
objection to the planning application by Popes Lane By Products for
a 12m chimney stack for their site in Church Lane, Astwood
Bank. The
basis of the objection was that: ·
This chimney is significantly
different from the shorter, more slender chimney for which
permission already exists.
·
That permission (given in the 1991 appeal) was
secured on the basis of a limited usage of the site for particular
operations. 50kg/hr
incinerating rate and incineration that was ancillary to the site’s
knackering operations. ·
The proposal being considered now
is 50% taller and is wider than the 1991 chimney – It is her
contention that this is because the usage of the site is being
altered and developed.
I am
urging you to object to this application
·
on the grounds of
appearance·
on the grounds of loss of amenity
of the nearby land. ·
on the grounds of a creeping
industrialisation of the site·
and finally she hopes that you will
make reference to the access difficulties that the burgeoning
development has to deal with.
In
terms of appearance: This
larger chimney in the setting that is proposed is
unacceptable. Nothing of this size has
been on the site before. It has a much larger
visual impact on the area than the original. It
is 50% taller and is wider that the original application indicated.
The taller chimney will be more visible to visitors to the
area. It will detract from the view that walkers
using the nearby footpaths have enjoyed for so long and it will
blight the view that local householders
have. Secondly, the proposed usage of
this chimney is a surely a pertinent matter on which to judge
appearance. There are no details about the usage
that this chimney may be put to. However
depending on what it discharges its appearance may alter
significantly. There
must be a difference between a chimney that will occasionally allow
steam to billow into the sky and one that might pour thick, dark,
ash laden smoke into the atmosphere 24 hours a day 365 days per
year. The use of the chimney is vital to judging
the appearance of the chimney and its impact on the visual amenity
of the area. There is a difference between start up, shutdown, maintenance discharges,
there is a difference in odours noticeable in different areas
depending on weather condiditions. Whatever
might be said at the meeting the details are not in the application
and they should be otherwise how can the implementation be
monitored properly.
In
relation to the loss of amenity in the neighbouring school,
footpath and houses. In
judging the potential loss of amenity caused by this development
the function of the chimney is crucial. The
topography of the site means that the proposed chimney will be
around level with the school playing field. The
chimney’s valley floor site will mean that air flows around the
area are difficult to map but there are no details about where
residues or odours from the chimney might fall during whatever
operations are planned.
A precautionary approach
should be employed. If there is no assurance
available that emissions for this industrial scale chimney will
cause no discomfort to the users of surrounding land, the Committee
should recommended
refusal.
In
terms of creeping
industrialisation:
In
the past, activity on the site has been piecemeal and small
scale. The 1991decision increased the
permissible scale of operations and the nature of the work
undertaken at the site. However, this was at a restricted level
with limited implications for the type and size of the plant
required. Now
the developers of the site have erected modern industrial
buildings, metal clad with roller shutter doors, they have put
tarmac along Popes Lane
and the carpark - all completely at
odds with their rural surroundings and historical
usage. The proposed chimney is another unwelcome
step in changing the appearance of this
site.
Finally, access
to this more industrial
site: The
continuing industrialisation of this site will entail visits to the
site from workers, officials, suppliers of fuel and materials and
customers. The access is simply not up to the
job. Lorries and cars will access the site along
an unmade, single-track lane shared with the first
school. There is no footpath and a sharp
junction with Church
Road with limited
visibility. Church Road is a busy, but narrow, road about which I have
recieved unrelated complaints about speeding traffic and
congestion. The Police have written to me
confirming their concerns about traffic in this
area. I
hope that Councillors will recommend refusal of this
application on appearance, amenity and access grounds and demand
that if a further application is made more information about the
usage of the chimney will be provided. Thank
you for your consideration of this matter.
Jacqui Smith
MP
| 
