From: EHWPriority.Enquiries@kent.gov.uk
Subject: 12099 - Otterpool Quarry, Sellindge
To: mavis.turton@btinternet.com
Cc: Paul.Carter-LEADER@kent.gov.uk, Richard.King@kent.gov.uk, Susan.Carey@kent.gov.uk
Date: Wednesday, 30 March, 2011, 10:54
Sent on behalf of Mr Bryan Sweetland
Dear Ms Turton
Thank for your further email in response to my previous correspondence in which I promised to forward Sharon Thompson (Head of Planning Applications Group) your concerns; in order that they could be brought to the attention of Planning Applications Committee members at their meeting earlier this month (when they were due to consider the application). Mrs Thompson has since confirmed that members were able to take into account the contents of you email before they resolved that permission be granted for the development.
In reaching their decision, whilst members were aware of the strength of local feeling, they nevertheless were also mindful of the need to comply with the general principles which must be followed governing how individual applications are to be considered. In addition to the objections received from local residents, regard must also be had to relevant government advice and development policy against which such proposals have to be considered. To ignore this would have laid the County Council open to a legal challenge and had permission been refused, unless it could be demonstrated that this was based on clear policy grounds, it is unlikely the Council could have successfully defended its decision at a public inquiry. In which case the applicant would have been able to seek substantial costs against the County Council.
Whilst members were mindful of objections raised by the Parish Council, Shepway District Council and the local member, Susan Carey, they were also aware that none of the technical consultees had raised an objection. This included the Environment Agency (E.A.) who will regulate the operation of the facility through a separate Environmental Permit. Notwithstanding that planning permission has been granted, unless the applicant can satisfy the E.A that he can meet their operational parameters a Permit would not be issued.
Other matters, particularly traffic impacts, were addressed in the officer's report and the permission will include specific conditions restricting the maximum numbers of daily vehicle movements to and from the site and also improvements to the site access, which will be designed to preclude vehicles from entering and the leaving the site in the direction of the Village of Sellindge to the west.
Whilst I appreciate that this is unlikely to satisfy your concerns I do hope that you will appreciate that in reaching a decision on the application the County Council had to abide by the relevant legislation. As requested I have passed on a copy of your email to Paul Carter, Leader of the County Council and to Richard King, the Chairman of the Planning Applications Committee.
Brian Sweetland
Member for Gravesham East
Cabinet Member - Environment, Highways & Waste - a 'Can Do' Organisation
Kent County Council
________________________________________
From: Mavis Turton [mailto:mavis.turton@btinternet.com]
Sent: 16 March 2011 10:08
To: EHW Priority Enquiries - EHW
Subject: Re: Planning Application - Otterpool Quarry, Sellindge
Dear Mr Sweetland,
Thank you for passing on my letter to the people responsible for dealing with the Planning application.I was present at the meeting, during which I felt that although there was some heckling, the residents of Sellindge were very restrained in their responses to points raised by both parties. This is probably because the main bulk of the people present were fairly elderly, myself included. Should such a meeting have been held at the weekend, when younger residents would not have been at work, it might have been different.
We went to the meeting, feeling deep in our hearts, that it was a "done deal", and none of us were really surprised at the outcome.
It now begs the philosophical question, "What is more important, Democracy or the rule of a few minor laws?"
Democracy is obviously not that important, although our society was based on it, or is supposed to be, because democratic principles were blatantly ignored considering that almost to a man, the petition against the development was signed by the whole population of Sellindge. The development was opposed by the Parish Council, Shepway Council, and our KCC councillor, Susan Carey,
Where does that leave us? Well, a few laws have frightened those who should be making decisions on our behalf, and they have decided to take the easy way out and grant planning permission. None of the attending residents were impressed by the comments that such developments are considered to be looked on favourably by the statement that, "It should be allowed if the benefit to the greater number should overrule the detriment of the few."
Much was said about ameliorating the impact of the plant, but mostly it was about the visual impact. Yes of course this can be made acceptable, and I am sure that the majority of people there were not so much concerned with the visual aspect of the application, but with something far more serious, that cannot in any way be "ameliorated", namely the amount of lorry movements per day, and the effect they will have on the village.
150-168 movements, and we can guess which will be the real number, would not be suitable for the stretch of road which has to carry the, especially road between the Junction 11 of the M20 to Newingreen turnoff. If you look on Virtual World on the computer, you will see how narrow the road is by the width of the lorry shown travelling at the time the image was recorded. The same website shows clearly that lorries leaving the Lympne Industrial estate, already "overnight" in the lay-by. It clearly demonstrates the fact that lorries do not
enter and exit the Industrial estate by using the M20 Junction 11. It is plain to see that lorries will still pass through Sellindge Village, and that waste lorries will not adhere 100% to the limitations that are suggested on lorry access. Sadly it is human nature to take the quickest convenient route, if nobody happens to be looking. There will of course be extra vehicles used by those working at the plant. Which route will they be taking? If they come from the Ashford direction of the A20, will they not be hampered by the proposed design of the lorry access.
Even if the lorry access is adhered to, the number of movements will increase significantly the diesel fumes in air quality. Lorries do not switch their engines off whilst waiting to unload. We all know that buses' engines idle when stopped, and are not switched off.
The danger to other vehicles, not just at the entry to the proposed plant has not been taken seriously enough, nor the impact of the increased number during the times when Operation Stack is in force.
I could go on, but that application should have been refused purely on the unsuitability of the road to accommodate the lorries alone, let alone the massive effects on local people, the Airport Cafe perhaps being the most affected, being just yards away from the entrance,
If Countrystyle Developments are serious in wishing to do the best for the people of Sellindge, perhaps they could be asked by KCC to undertake the widening of the road between Junction 11 and Newingreen, together with meeting the cost of purchasing land to do so. Maybe that is a condition which should be imposed on them by the Environment Agency, or anyone else who has jurisdiction, such as KCC Highways.
As all my letters are sent to the Residents Association for their files, I would be grateful of any comments received by me.
I would be grateful if my letter can be shown to the Planning Committee. and of course to Paul Carter, who I think would be innterested.
Sincerely ,
Mavis Turton
--- On Tue, 15/3/11, EHWPriority.Enquiries@kent.gov.uk
From: EHWPriority.Enquiries@kent.gov.uk
Subject: Planning Application - Otterpool Quarry, Sellindge
To: mavis.turton@btinternet.com
Date: Tuesday, 15 March, 2011, 9:48
Sent on behalf of Mr Bryan Sweetland
Dear Ms Turton
Thank you for your email concerning the planning application at the Otterpool Quarry, Sellindge. I note your very strong objection to the application and have sent your email to the Head of Planning Applications so that she can bring your concerns to the attention of the Committee prior to them making a decision on the application.
Planning applications have to be determined in accordance with the development plan and have to be considered on the evidence that is submitted. In Kent that responsibility is given to the Council's Planning Application Committee and other elected members of the Council do not play a role in determining planning applications.
Yours sincerely
Bryan Sweetland
------------------Original Message--------------------
From: mavis turton
Sent: 2011/03/13 12:01:31
To: county.hall@kent.gov.uk
Subject: For Paul Carter
Dear Mr Carter,
You have written to me before about issues which were concerning the people of Sellindge, and I find myself writing to you again in desperation.
Next Tuesday, the 15thMarch, the Planning Department will be making a decision about whether to allow the planning application of Countrystyle Developments, who wish to blight our village of Sellindge with perhaps the most abhorrent scheme that we have ever faced as a community, namely the construction of a waste and anaerobic digester plant on the edge of our village. The proposed development is, I am sure you will know, close to residential properties and also a thriving restaurant business.
It has been said that “technical problems” associated with the site can be overcome, but this is just not true. How do you overcome the technical issues when 150 lorry movements are planned PER DAY. The approach roads are much too narrow, and the interruption to normal traffic along the A20 will be intolerable to those going to and from work/school. The carbon monoxide emissions cannot be overcome, nor the smell issuing from the lorries carrying the waste food etc. In bad weather conditions and dark evenings or mornings will render the traffic positively dangerous. Many of these sites have vermin and flies problems, and the prevailing South Westerly winds will carry bad smells right over the village. The developers themselves mentioned “ammonia and sulphur dioxide”. When I spoke at the meeting at the village hall, I said that if I remember my science at school well enough, those gases smell like urine soaked nappies and rotten eggs.
I have lived in Sellindge for quite some time, and we seem to have borne the brunt of anything undesirable.
Sellindge has had its life blighted by SEVEN different threats to the community, three of which have already come about. The M20 motorway, the High Speed Rail Link and the Electricity Converter Station, all major eyesores.
Why on earth are we now being asked to absorb FOUR MORE.
I speak of the proposed wind turbine development, with its masts of around three times the height of Ashford Church, the threat of the proposed lorry park, for 3,000 lorries, and the proposed housing development of goodness knows how many more houses. Worst of all, the dread that the KCC will pass the planning application by Countrystyle Developments to build the Waste disposal facility at Otterpool Lane.
I went to the first of the meetings that were held in our village hall, when representatives of Countrystyle Developments told us, when we enquired whether we could visit any of this type of plant, that there were only two others, on in the Outer Hebrides and the other on the Continent somewhere. This was completely untrue, as there are others in this country much closer, in Ealing, London for example, and Nottingham, just to name two. Clearly it was not in their interest for us to examine them. Surely you are not going to allow a company who made such deceitful statements hoodwink you too, by saying that any problems can be overcome?
You, as leader of the KCC must hold considerable sway over the outcome, and I am sure that after reading my letter you will think, as we all do, that already Sellindge has had more than its fair share of attack by planners, and that especially in the case of the waste disposal site, there must be far more suitable places to build such atrocities than in a village.
Yours sincerely,
Mavis Turton, longtime resident of Sellindge
