A depressingly familar story from the past concerning land raise

Sussex Express Series (Lewes, England), May 23, 2002

'.. Villagers who fought a successful campaign against land raise waste disposal sites on their doorstep are gearing up to fight a new threat to their environment.

Parish councils in Chiddingly, Laughton, East Hoathly and Chalvington with Ripe joined to form a campaign group called Clear when four sites at Halland, East Hoathly, Chiddingly and Laughton were suggested for land raise.

They were supported by Selmeston, Firle, Berwick, Alfriston and Ringmer parish councils and the town council of Polegate in the battle which culminated in a large scale demonstration at Lewes. That led to a promise of support from county councillors who later voted to exclude land raise on greenfield sites in Sussex.

But the councils are on their guard again because land raise has slipped into the county's second deposit waste plan.

Sites are not specified, but the document says: 'There shall be a very strong presumption against any land raising provision for non-inert waste on greenfield sites.

'No such provision will be considered until all appropriate previously developed sites have been investigated and eliminated.'

That has triggered Clear's alarm once more because they claim the only area that could be targeted for land raise covers their villages in the Low Weald.

One of the members Mr Nigel Braden said the Downs and High Weald, which are categorised as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, could not be considered because of that.

'We have been told that land raising will not go on greenfield sites, but the way this is written makes it an open door policy for any contractor coming to lodge a planning application for disposal sites in greenfield areas.

'We will do whatever we need to do to register this point and if it comes to a public inquiry we will vociferously oppose any principle of land raising on greenfield areas.'

Wealden councillor Sylvia Tidy, who represents Chiddingly and East Hoathly, fought at a meeting of the council's executive last week to get Wealden support for opposing land raise in the Low Weald but failed.

She argued that the landscape of the Low Weald was unsuitable for land raise because it was flat and while new hills of refuse could be lost in hilly areas they would stand out in the Low Weald.

But councillors were told the suggestion of land raise could not be excluded from the plan because of a hefty shortfall in provision of waste disposal facilities.

And Cllr Teresa Blaxland, representing Heathfield, said that to suggest Low Weald should be protected at the expense of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty would be very difficult for the county to sustain at a public inquiry and very difficult for Wealden to argue. Other executive members agreed ..'

Article from Chiddingly Parish - 7 Hills News (Spring 2010)

The newsletter of Chiddingly Parish Council

Say NO to ‘Waste Mountains’ in Our Villages

East Sussex County Council (ESCC)) are planning to build ‘land-raise’ waste sites in the Low Weald.  One of these sites is in Chiddingly Parish.  These sites will receive municipal solid and commercial waste including food, wood, plastics, glass and metal.  Decomposition of these materials will produce methane, carbon dioxide and ‘leachate’ that, despite many assurances, in my opinion will eventually find its way into local rivers and water courses.

I have been campaigning to put a stop to these waste mountains as I believe:

• They are unsightly

• They occupy a large amount of land that could be put to better use

• They harbour vermin and encourage seagulls

• They often smell

• They produce leachate

• They require at least 72 HGV trips per day causing even more highway congestion and additional CO2 emission

In order to ensure ESCC really understood how much opposition there is to land raise 11 Parish Councils formed an Action Group (PCAG) to fight the principle of land raise. This Group promoted and organised a public meeting on 23rd January where over 400 people, supported by 2 MPs and 10 District Councillors, clearly demonstrated their disapproval of the proposals to members and Officers of ESCC.

The PCAG continue to lobby MPs, County Councillors and other organisations to ensure that ESCC consider the many other options to land raise. We also liaise with and support a number of individual action groups that have been set up in each of the affected parishes to campaign against their own particular sites.

For more details contact your Parish representative on this Group, Guy Baigent (01825 890373).

We don’t need Waste Mountains; there are many other methods available to dispose of it. Why didn’t ESCC consider even more useful waste to energy schemes – e.g. combustion, pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion?

What can you do to help to ensure a waste mountain doesn’t end up on your doorstep?

Make sure you’re part of the Waste Hierarchy.

Reduce Reuse Recycle

Reduce – lobby your MP to ensure the next Government makes it a priority to obtain agreement by manufacturers to reduce their packaging. Next time you grocery shop – leave the unnecessary packaging at the checkout.

Reuse – donate unwanted items to charities or use websites like FreeMesa.org for the larger items.

Recycle – you all know already!

Composting – get a composter, a Green Cone or Green Johanna food waste digester from as little as £9.95 from Wealden District Council (01892 602626 email: recycling@wealden.gov.uk).

At present ESCC are working their way through the 2000+ objections before publishing their ultimate strategy later in the year.

Barby Dashwood-Hall

Wealden District Councillor.

01323 844374

Sussex Ouse Conservation Society - 4th January 2010

Proposed land fill/land raise sites in East Sussex threaten the ecology of the Sussex Ouse

The Sussex Ouse Conservation Society has lodged a formal objection to land fill/land raise sites that have been proposed in East Sussex which in the Societies opinion could compromise the environmental integrity of the River Ouse and certain of the rivers feeder streams.

We cannot find any proposals within the information provided on leachate management which is naturally of great concern. If these were included we would still be most unhappy as any such measures could still fail over time or fail as a result of human error. The river catchment is rich in numerous fish species and other wildlife, it is also the source of water provided to your homes by South East Water who abstract immediately above Barcombe Mills.

In line with our remit as a Society to concentrate upon the river we have not covered the very many other problems that will be caused by these sites. These include the considerable increase in heavy goods vehicle traffic, noise and air pollution, health issues, visual degradation etc. These issues will cause very real problems to not only the local population but also to those living further afield.

Sussex Ouse Conservation Society Land Raise Objections(PDF)

14th January 2010

Ian Blake, Esq.,
Waste & Minerals Planning Team,
East Sussex County Council,
County Hall,
St. Anne’s Crescent,
Lewes,
East Sussex
BN7 1UB.

Dear Mr. Blake,

Waste and Minerals Core Strategy - Preferred Strategy
Consultation process ending on 15th January 2010

I am writing as a resident of Laughton to strongly object to any proposals to dispose of waste on landraise sites in the Low Weald of East Sussex.  It is totally unacceptable and inappropriate to be considering disposing of waste to land in such a way in the 21st century.  It is also against EEC directives.

I would like to make the following points which should be considered under Question 13:

1. Why have you not identified any brownfield sites for such a disposal of waste?

2. Why have you not considered the building of a new incinerator in East Sussex to deal with such waste?

3. Why have you gone against the principle that waste should be dealt with as near to its source as possible?  The proximity principle should apply.

4. Why has East Sussex & Brighton & Hove not done more to reduce and recycle waste as they were supposed to under the Waste Local Plan?

5. I am concerned about the impact on residents of any potential landraise site - health issues, vermin, smell, water pollution, methane gas, the disposal of leachate and other by-products

6. Any such site would destroy rural and remote areas of East Sussex which need to be protected.  There is also the issue of ancient buildings, ancient woodlands, rare and protected wildlife, the impact any such site would  have on agriculture.

7. What will happen to any such site after it has fulfilled its use - how will it be restored to its previous state?

8. Any increase in traffic would have a detrimental effect on local residents.

9. East Sussex County Council has a duty of care to protect 'rural tranquillity'.  How can the disposal of waste to landraise sites on greenfield areas do this?

I strongly object to the principle the disposal of waste to landraise on greenfield sites.  Please acknowledge the receipt of this letter to me at the above address.

Yours sincerely,

Copy to:   

Councillor Matthew Lock
Councillor Geoffrey Theobald OBE
The Rt. Hon. Norman Baker, M.P.
The Rt. Hon. Charles Hendry, M.P.

East Sussex County Council (ESCC) must include in the current process ALL PREVIOUS OBJECTIONS that they have not answered to the satisfaction of the public.

The previous objections had sufficient merit at the time they were made (10 years ago) to stop ESCC introducing Land Raise sites in East Sussex and nothing has occurred in the interim to invalidate them

These historic objections still 'hold good' and cannot be extinguished by either ESCC wishes or the passing of time. The onus is on ESCC to answer ALL these previous objections or demonstrate (with verifyable evidence) that they no longer valid.

The only way these historic objections can cease to be a valid part of the process is if they have been comprehensively addressed to the satisfaction of those members of the public who initially raised them

We do not believe that the original objections have been addressed by ESCC and therefore would ESCC please confirm that each and every historic objection will form part of the current assessment / consultation process.