Login Register

Beauty spot 'could spell end' to incinerator plans

By citizenmike  |  Posted: November 29, 2012

What the incinerator might look like

What the incinerator might look like

Comments (0)

Plans to build an incinerator at Haresfield could fall down because the site is near to an area of outstanding natural beauty.

It comes as plans to build four wind turbines near Stinchcombe were thrown out by a Government inspector because of the impact they could have on the environment.

Now planning experts at Stroud District Council have warned that the £500million scheme by Gloucestershire County Council and incinerator firm Urbaser Balfour Beatty to build a waste-to-energy plant at Javelin Park could suffer the same fate if they are heard by an inspector.

Green energy firm Ecotricity had hoped to build their turbines in the Vale of Berkeley but the plan was rejected by the Stroud council.

Then they went to appeal but an inspector backed the council's decision.

Gloucestershire County Council and UBB have been told they could face a similar problem if the incinerator plans are picked up for an appeal or judicial review.

Sue Oppenheimer, chairman of protest group GlosVAIN, said: "I agree a 100 per cent with the concerns.

"It seems reckless to continue with the plans.

"If four wind turbines are going to have an impact on the environment then this huge building certainly will. It is unacceptable."

But a UBB chief has dismissed the claims.

Javier Peiro, project director for UBB, said: "Our proposals for an energy from waste facility at Javelin Park are not located within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

"Every planning application should be considered on its own merits and Javelin Park is allocated in Gloucestershire's waste core strategy as a suitable site for a strategic waste management facility."

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters
  • Ysedra  |  December 04 2012, 4:31PM


    Rate   2
  • Ysedra  |  December 04 2012, 4:30PM

    For the third time of attempting to post, CTFCScout, how big do you think the incinerator needs to be?

    Rate   1
  • CTFCScout  |  December 03 2012, 1:23AM

    Great news! The Incinerator proposed there is far too big for purpose.

    Rate   2
  • FreeRadical1  |  December 01 2012, 3:49PM

    Being right next to the AONB didn't stop planning permission for the new motorway service area, so i think that this may be clutching at straws. the county council will, presumably, argue that the incinerator is necessary to replace landfill. Other technologies don't actually get rid of the waste.

    Rate   5
  • Ysedra  |  December 01 2012, 10:18AM

    Bang goes another red herring...

    Rate   6
  • Councilwonk  |  November 30 2012, 11:39AM

    Standish Green - I didn't say anything about that - I said you might be confused when you said there was a height limit for development at the Javelin Park site. I can't think of any mechanism that would allow a height limit like that to be put in place, other than as part of planning permission, which obviously hasn't been decided in the case of the proposed incinerator. That's nothing to do with the Inspector's findings in the case of the proposed windfarm.

    Rate   8
  • Ysedra  |  November 30 2012, 10:00AM

    Can you actually show us the 'reference to Javelin Park', standishgreen, rather than just a reference to it?

    Rate   4
  • standishgreen  |  November 29 2012, 7:30PM

    I can assure you I am not confused Councilwonk. The wind turbines were turned down because of: "the impact of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area and upon the nearby Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)" An Inspector, in dismissing appeal ref: APP/H1840/A/06/2023564, addressed the issue of the proposed development of a haulage depot and storage buildings outside the AONB that impacted adversely on views out from the Cotswolds AONB: "From the elevated vantage point of the Cotswold Way [within the AONB] the greater density of the development would be readily apparent, as although the site forms part of a vast panorama, it would be towards the front of that view." And towards the Cotswolds AONB: "From lower viewpoints … the breach of the AONB skyline would not be mitigated" That was with reference to Javelin Park. So whilst every application is dealt with on its merits, these precedents cannot be overturned unless an overriding need is established and they cant do that because what they need is a solution, not specifically this solution. The other options are still available.

    Rate 0
  • Councilwonk  |  November 29 2012, 6:59PM

    Standish Green, I think you might be a bit confused here. Any height restriction can only be as part of a planning permission already in place for a site - there isn't, I don't think, any such thing as a general height restriction, which would apply to any future planning application. That would be a consideration for a planning committee considering any planning application.

    Rate   5
  • zerowaster  |  November 29 2012, 6:34PM

    Mr Peiro doesn't know his Gloucestershire. The Stinchcombe site is not in the AONB - it's right next to it, just like Javelin Park, which is half a mile from the AONB. But he's right that every application should be considered on its own merits - which will rule out the incinerator application as there are no merits!

    Rate   8