The proposed access road will run across these fields and destroy 35 trees. The field in the distance is home to skylarks, red listed as an endangered UK species

Comments on Environmental Statement

1. The identification of the Seghill site as the best option seems to be based on a statement regarding the catchment area, which stretches from Northumberland to Sunderland. There is no explanation of how the catchment area is calculated and with such a large catchment surely Castle Morpeth, Tynedale and Wansbeck waste disposal sites (all much smaller sites than Seghill with greater capacity to expand) should be considered primarily.

2. The EU directive regarding waste states that member states must:

Encourage:

The prevention or reduction of waste
Recover waste through recycling, re-use, reclamation

And ensure:

That waste is recovered and disposed of without endangering human health or the environment
That an adequate network of waste disposal sites is set up to take waste to the nearest facilities.

Taking the first two points we have a recycling system in place in Blyth Valley, therefore if anything is going to be built why isn't it a recycling facility - by expanding the landfill capacity it does not seem to be driving the local waste management system to comply with the legislation.

With regard to the second set of points, the expansion of the site which I understand is the second or third time that the site has been extended will impact significantly on the environment, in that it virtually excludes the green belt which currently exists between Backworth and Seghill.

On the final point I can't understand how transporting waste from Sunderland and Northumberland to Seghill could be in compliance with the 'nearest facilities'. Clause 2.1.2 in the ES clearly states that:

"in applying for the extension of the site SITA are well aware that they are in breach of the obligations set out by the EU and the National Strategy."

3. Clause 3.5 states that the site will be managed in phases with previously worked on areas reinstated - where is the program for this and which areas will be reinstated (I must stress I haven't had time to pore over all the details, so a plan or program may be there).

This has to be made clear to assess the overall impact on the environment of the site extension. The measure of whether a planning application to build/utilise Green Belt can be approved is that the application must firstly preserve the openness of the Green Belt.

"In this particular case the current plan absorbs even more of the Green Belt which limits access rather than maintaining the openness."

The only way that I can see openness being maintained is if the same portion of the existing site is closed and landscaped in relation to the new area that is being applied for. Apparently SITA have conducted an assessment under clause 4.2.1 and it conclusively proves that building in the Green Belt should be allowed - where is the assessment, what was it based on, can we have a copy?

I have attached an e-mail on a link to a report complied by Northumberland County Council on waste which states that if the application does preserve the openness of the Green Belt (which I do not believe this one does), then landfill will only be allowed in cases of infilling mineral sites, removal of derelict or down graded land or if the land is returned to an acceptable landform.

In our case I would guess we fall into the last option of return to an acceptable landform, currently the land is used by walkers, cyclists and riders who all use the network of bridleways and foot paths - how can the area be returned to an acceptable landform when a large portion of it will be a big hill which can't be used by the majority of cyclists, riders and walkers.

Acceptable must surely be that it is returned to it's original condition. Clause 4.4.4 classes a portion of the land as 'low quality' but this assessment seems to ignore the value of the farming land which is currently high quality as it provides food production for both humans and animals.

Northumberland Waste Local Plan (Link to council papers)

4. Clause 3.10 talks about visual impact - consideration has to be given at this point to the current custom and practice that SITA use to operate the present site. Aside from the visual impact of the hill, a large portion of the current waste blows from the site and covers a much larger area than the current site boundary - there is no acknowledgement of this or how it could be controlled.

Section 4.6 goes on to discuss odours - the site which is operational emits odours and at present SITA do not seem able to control these odours; again there is no explanation as to how this will be prevent/eliminated. The proximity of the site to the Grange for example and the current practice of general littering and odours will obviously increase the vermin population around the Grange and hence must be endangering human health.

Reproduced from an email by Kirsty Thirlwell - no changes made to text, emphases are mine - Garry C.

top