Recycling - why here - 62 other sites not selected by Countrystyle - why? Judicial Review

From: Mavis Turton <mavis.turton@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Response to your Query : - Ref:DWOE000228375 - FW: Sellindge Residents' Association,Kent
To: ccu.correspondence@defra.gsi.gov.uk
Date: Sunday, 8 May, 2011, 9:36

Dear Mr Griffiths, We all heartily agree with everything you say about the need for sensible recycling, and Sellindge people are not going against this policy.  What we are objecting to is the environmental impact of having such a site so near residential property.  Indeed, a thriving restaurant business on the A20 is a matter of metres away from the entrance of the site, where diesel fumes and waste smells will have a major impact on their trade.  Indeed, I do not believe the business, which is well patronises, will survive.  A village is not the place for such a development, and very narrow winding stretches of road will present a major threat to safety of other road users, considering that an estimated (according to the developer) 40,000 heavy lorries will be using it each year.  A lorry will enter the site about every 8 minutes.  Sixty two other sites were passed over by Countrystyle Developments, and I just do not believe there was a more suitable place to build. We have a qualified engineer and surveyor on the Sellindge Residents' Association, and he has asked questions which I do not believe have yet been answered. At the KCC meeting, there were fifteen members of planning, three of whom fell asleep during the process, not deciding for themselves either.  They were told by Mrs Sharon Thomson that they have to vote in agreement to the planning application.The Council should be there to uphold the best interests of the people, and it is is plainly not being done. Two thousand villagers signed a petition against the site virtually everyone who lives in the village.  Our Parish Council, the District Council of Shepway, our Conservative County Councillor, and Damian Collins, Conservative MP for Shepway, all opposed the planning application.  We were just ridden over roughshod. Having seen "Democracy" in action for myself, having attended the meeting, I have decided that there is no point in ever going to the polls again, and I have voted in every election since I was old enough to do so.  I am now 72.  I was disgusted that members of the KCC who were deciding our future, not only fell asleep during the process, but would have been paid quite handsomely for attending this farcical spectacle. I do thank you for your reply, and we shall go on agitating for more information, and are hoping to seek a judicial review.  Regards, Mavis Turton --- On Wed, 4/5/11, ccu.correspondence@defra.gsi.gov.uk <ccu.correspondence@defra.gsi.gov.uk> wrote: From: ccu.correspondence@defra.gsi.gov.uk <ccu.correspondence@defra.gsi.gov.uk> Subject: Response to your Query : - Ref:DWOE000228375 - FW: Sellindge Residents' Association,Kent To: mavis.turton@btinternet.com Date: Wednesday, 4 May, 2011, 11:27 Dear Mrs Turton, Thank you for your email of 10 April to the Secretary of State detailing your concerns about a Materials Recycling Facility & Anaerobic Digestion Plant proposed at Otterpool Quarry, Ashford Road, Sellinge, Ashford, Kent. I have been asked to reply. This Government is working towards a zero waste economy, and carrying out a Waste Review to develop policies to meet this ambition. We expect to report back findings in May or June 2011. In addition, the EU Waste Framework Directive requires us to apply a ‘waste hierarchy’ that ranks waste management options in order of environmental preference: prevention, preparation for reuse, recycling, energy recovery and, finally, disposal (e.g. landfill). Defra is working to transpose this hierarchy into UK law to minimise the burden on businesses and regulators and reduce waste. The Government is also committed to obtaining more of our energy from renewable sources, and is a strong supporter of Anaerobic Digestion (AD) technology, although does not advocate this exclusively. Ultimately it is local authorities, rather than the Government, who are responsible for deciding how waste is managed in local areas. Defra believes that local authorities are better placed to make decisions on local waste management strategy, so does not normally interfere. Similarly, Defra is not a party in the planning approvals process, as it is local authorities who secure appropriate planning and licensing permission, processes which involve assessing potential environmental impacts, along with proximity to housing, road network and likely changes in traffic flow. The waste technology chosen will reflect varying local circumstances. For residual waste, the Government expects to see technology options appraised logically and thoroughly, minimising the Biodegradable Municipal Waste (BMW) going to landfill, whilst maximising renewable energy and recovery of materials. The Secretary of State has powers to ‘call in’ a particular environmental permit application and can have appellate function further down the line. To fulfil these potential roles, she must be able to demonstrate even-handed, unbiased, properly directed, and independent consideration. The procedure must remain fair and avoid any appearance of bias by not being engaged in particular applications or taking into account private representations. She cannot, therefore, comment on the specific aspects of this case. I hope you find this information helpful. Yours sincerely,  Anthony Griffiths Customer Contact Unit Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) This email and any attachments is intended for the named recipient only. If you have received it in error you have no authority to use, disclose, store or copy any of its contents and you should destroy it and inform the sender. Whilst this email and associated attachments will have been checked<br>for known viruses whilst within Defra systems we can accept no responsibility once it has left our systems. Communications on Defra's computer systems may be monitored and/or recorded to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes.