|One of the many protests against the incinerator|
There is another public meeting locally in Whiteshill and Ruscombe Village Hall on 24th Jan - see here details - unfortunately it is Budget meeting on 24th so I will miss the talk - it still amazes me that the Conservatives at the County are still going forward with the incinerator - even the District Council Tories are opposed .
There is a chance we can still stop this - do also see my recent incinerator talk (2 films) at Randwick Village Hall on Stroud Community TV: http://stroudcommunity.tv/tag/incinerator/
Films of talks are not great but they do cover some of the key issues....
See key points by District Development Control Committee below and download the District Council's paper at: www.stroud.gov.uk/info/members/cms.../Agenda_item_6.pdf
Development Control Committee resolves to raise the following additional objections:-
1. Despite the justification put forward by the applicants, due to its scale, height, massing and industrial character the proposed structure fails to mitigate the harm it causes to the Cotswold AONB, its setting and the rural landscape. Additionally the social, environmental and economic benefits of the proposal do not outweigh the landscape harm, contrary to Policy WCS14 of the Draft Waste Core Strategy.
2. The scale, height, massing and industrial character of the proposed structure does not reflect or contribute positively to the character and quality of the area contrary to policy WCS17 of the Draft Waste Core Strategy.
3. In arriving at a potential judgement that the benefits outweigh the costs, the County Council has not consulted upon or provided any clear evidence that demonstrates how the performance of alternative solutions (which could still be within the scope of the Draft Waste Core Strategy) have been independent sustainability appraisal exists that would provide a sound basis for decision making.
4. The applicant has determined the waste capacity of the facility based on GCC figures and their own assessment of demand, it is however inappropriate for the market to determine scale and technology where there is such a harmful impact on rural landscape, the Cotswold AONB and its setting.
5. The site constraints, including the availability of a residual heat user should determine both technology and scale.
6. Given the evidence of significant falling waste volumes (excluding garden and HRC) and the number and capacity of permitted residual waste schemes in the region, the County Council should urgently reassess the need for a facility of this type, of this scale and in this location.
7. Further information is still required in order to categorically determine if noise levels will be acceptable.
8. Further clarification is required with regard to
the modelling process, as is confirmation that the EA are satisfied with the model used for the human health determinant.