VEOLIA POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENERGY RECOVERY FACILITY

Published: 03 September 2019

 

Please click here to view Bentley Parish Council's comments for this planning application.  

The Scoping report is 95 pages long which is probably sufficiently long and technical to discourage a lot of people from taking the trouble to read it. It is attached. Just upload it and then open. Issues of medium concern are highlighted in yellow. Issues of high concern are highlighted in pink.

To view the whole report, please click here 

https://binstedparishcouncil.files.wordpress.com/2019/08/veolia-scoping-report.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1TgKWbHy3xquiQAEH4tr17JUlF1P8CyYy819LgImWmTcB9QXflK-Q8gPo

It is clear that this scoping report is just a forerunner to a planning application. Getting the planning application rejected will be much more difficult as Veolia will have invested so much more in the intervening time.

To save others hours of effort, a summary of comments is attached. It is only 9 pages long, instead of 96. It is far from perfect and could be improved if there was more time. There isn’t. The aim is to highlight issues so others can cherry-pick what concerns them and submit their comments by the deadline. It would NOT be helpful if my document was simply forwarded on: that is my exclusive privilege. Anyway, many of my comments are written from the perspective of a house owner who already has direct line of sight on the current, comparatively modest, facility.

This proposed development will affect everyone in different ways: visual impact (from local neighbourhood and the A31), permanent and irreversible loss of rural character, noise, light, steam vapour trail and possibly pollutants, air quality, rail and road visibility, increased traffic density (especially through Farnham), HGVs conducting very hazardous U turns on the A31, wear and tear on road infrastructure (more maintenance), reduction in land and property prices, detrimental effects on other local business, leisure and recreational facilities, etc.

This proposed development, its magnitude, character and potential affects, is the ’thin edge of the wedge’. If it goes through, the character of this area of Hampshire will be permanently and irreversibly changed. Thereafter, it will be harder to stop other industrial developments. Also, this development must be viewed together with the compounding effects of:

  1. Continued expansion of Alton and Bordon affecting the A31 which is bad enough already, especially through Farnham.
  2. Potential development of Northbrook Estate (industrial complex and 800 houses) on the A31.
  3. Prospect of 240 new houses at Neatham Downs off the A31.

The accumulated effect could be ‘gridlock’ around Farnham, and possibly elsewhere.

To assist people to make a valued judgement, I am enclosing the following very disturbing article:

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/incineration-going-unchecked-as-report-highlights-portsmouth-pollution-1-8569576

A fire from waste is reported here:

https://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/17763822.fire-beddington-lane-recycling-centre-brought-control/

It is possible to defeat these developments, as was achieved at Hoddesdon, Hertfordshire. See:

https://www.hoddesdon-against-incineration.co.uk

Here are some example of existing similar plants:

   
   

I am also attaching an impression of what this ERF might look like at Alton. The shape is probably neither accurate, nor important. It is the size of the components and how it will dominate your countryside that is important.

Please register your OBJECTION before 5th September to:

Sam Dumbrell
Planning@hants.gov.uk
Ref: PLAN/SD/EH141

Even if you do not think you will directly affected, the residents of Froyle, Bentley and Binsted (including myself) will be hugely grateful if you would:

  1. Submit your objection.
  2. Inform as many people as possible so they can submit their objections by the deadline. You might use your email contact list, local Facebook page, Twitter, newspaper, local radio, etc.

We want to stir up such a storm of objections to convince Veolia now to abandon these plans for this rural site and take them elsewhere where it is more appropriate and where there will be less opposition. No rural location will welcome such a development on their door step. It must be assumed that Veolia will opt for the site of least resistance, minimum trouble and minimal cost to develop.