Home
About
Community
Planning
Gardens & wildlife
History
Links

Veolia 2006-consultations

CONSULTATIONS pages 31 to 34
External consultees;

Neighbours: At the time of writing, a total of 2182 letters have been received, comprising: 2157 letters from residents objecting to the scheme, 23 letters from organised groups objecting to the scheme and 2 letters from individuals supporting the scheme. The content of these are all summarised below. (The addresses of those that have commented are contained within the Appendices. Some of the letters on behalf of organisations and groups are outlined in more detail in the report under individual headings.)

In summary, the main issues raised by residents in their letters of objection relate to the following:

31

residents' comments

local politicians' comments

Brighton Society and Conservation Advisory Group

Downs School Head's and Governors' comments

Residents' comments

  • Will result in excessive traffic generation and congestion in an already busy area;
  • Will result in excessive noise and vibration from traffic and operation;
  • Will result in excessive pollution from traffic and operation in an already polluted area;
  • Will result in excessive odour;
  • Adverse impact on quality of life
  • Site unsuitable for a major waste site. It was originally designated for industrial use when it was on the outskirts of the city, then abattoir closed;
  • Site is unsuitable as surrounded by many homes and schools;
  • Should be located on outskirts near by-pass;
  • Scheme is too big and exceeds capacity projections for recycling;
  • Air quality contaminants associated with increased traffic will cause health problems, particularly to vulnerable school children at nearby Downs Infant and Junior Schools (acknowledged as 'significant receptors') and Hertford Infants School and nearby nursery schools;
  • Adverse impact to health and safety;
  • Will blight area;
  • Will add to existing problems of air quality management area at Vogue Gyratory;
  • Downs Infant School playground very close (10-20m);
  • Adverse impact on highway safety and walking and cycling environment as a result of increased traffic;
  • Operational times of 7am-10pm, 7 days a week unreasonable and leaves no respite; (now revised)
  • Hollingdean Road railway bridge unsuitable for proposed traffic as is too narrow, has a blind spot and will cause accidents;
  • Buildings out of character;
  • Adverse impact to Roundhill Conservation Area; Road surface in area will suffer damage; Will attract vermin and flies;
  • Will be a fire risk; Contrary to Children and Young Peoples Plan;
  • Will adversely affects local businesses; Some state that whilst not opposed to recycling in principle, proposal is excessive; Insufficient consideration of alternatives; More smaller sites should be used instead eg Hangleton Bottom or Wilson Avenue site should not take all the city rubbish;
  • Proposal is contrary to council policy of reducing traffic;
  • If remove WTS can fit in rail siding; Adverse impact during construction (noise, dust, traffic);
  • Other technologies should be looked at eg composting or conversion into other fuels;
  • Proposal is linked to incinerator proposed at Newhaven which is unsustainable and dangerous; Routing of City Clean vehicles should be controlled as part of the application;
  • Amendments since previous application only minor;
  • Lack of public consultation;

32

  • Adverse effect on house prices;
  • Removal of HGV no-left turn at Ditchling Road unacceptable (Note this is unrelated to the application and does not form part of it. it relates to a Traffic Order currently under consideration) In summary, the 2 neighbour letters supporting the scheme relate to the following:
  • Facility is vital for future management of waste in the city
  • Proposal is suitable sited
  • Proposal would be of visual benefit to derelict site
  • Facility would give much-needed local employment

Local politicians' comments

Brighton Pavilion MP David Lepper: Objects on the following grounds:

Site unsuitable for waste - is a densely populated residential area Site for a refuse transfer station off Hollingdean Road was rejected in 1980 as unsuitable Existing depot has caused noise problems.

- Waste Local Plan highlights that the local road network my limit the total capacity of facilities provided at Hollingdean.

- Area has limited capacity to accommodate 60 large vehicle movements, particularly the Vogue Gyratory and narrow railway bridge.

Proposal would bring increased traffic movements closer to Downs Infant School playground Regret that a full assessment of other alternative sites not carried out since last application

- The city waste facility at Hollingdean was on the edge of an urban area when it opened 120 years ago - it has since changed and a new site should be sought on edge of city
(Note: A copy of his letter is attached at the Appendix.)

 

Hollingbury and Stanmer Ward Councillors Framroze, Hawkes and Lepper: Object to the proposal on the following grounds:

- Wrong to locate a facility of this size in a major residential area with consequent increase in heavy traffic and associated air pollution and noise. This goes against modern principals of environmental planning and it should be located on a site outside a residential area

- There is a more suitable site for a facility of this size

- Threat to health, safety and educational development of pupils of Downs Infant

- School, Downs Junior School and other nearby schools Use of narrow railway bridge problematic

- Amendment of additional covered way to MRF near playground does not remove concern

- Concern over proposed opening hours and impact on nearby residents
(Note: A copy of their letters are attached at the Appendix.)

33

Preston Park Ward Councillor Juliet Mc Caffery: Objects on the following grounds:

- the facility is far too large

- revision to the planning application only minor

- increased traffic in a residential area

-railway bridge unsuitable to accommodate 2 large vehicles

- increased noise and pollution

- a site near the by-pass should be sought (Note: A copy of her letter is attached at the Appendix.)

Architects' Panel: The Panel thought this scheme looked more awkward than the previous application in relation to the green roofed element which sits as a separate element to the other buildings with curved roofs; suggested trying a series of flat grassed roofs; the materials proposed could be more environmentally friendly to relate to the purpose of the site; more consideration may need to be given to controlling surface water drainage, light pollution and dust issues.

The Brighton Society

The Brighton Society: Object.

- Proposal does not differ significantly from previous application.

- Site unsuitable and is surrounded by homes and schools.

- Significant traffic increase.

-Alternative Sites Assessment contains questionable conclusions.

- The Environmental Statement is severely flawed.

- The buildings will be basic metal sheds, the cheapest form of building. Grey colour proposed out of keeping with area.

Conservation Advisory Group: No comment.

Countryside Agency: No formal representations to make as do not consider that proposal falls into the category of 'having a fundamental effect on the intrinsic character of a national park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or that it would set a national precedent where government advice is lacking'.

Downs Infant School

Downs Infant School (Head Teacher): Object.

- Site is surrounded by homes and schools and is not suitable.

- Air quality already poor in area. If at all, should be a much smaller operation.

- Hollingdean already deprived and ugly with poor quality of life, this will not be a step up.

- Site is very close to playground used by 360 children.

- Noise will be unacceptable as will make learning difficult and playing unpleasant.

- Proposal will generate pollution (even with MRF tunnel now proposed).

- Large aircraft hanger buildings will be imposing and depressing and unpleasant.

- Area around the school is already congested. Proposal will be an accident danger.

- Proposal will put off parents enrolling their children at the school.

- A number of smaller sites across the city is the way forward.

Downs Infant School & Downs Junior School (Chair of Governors): Object.

- Proposal would adversely affect children due to pollution and extra traffic.

- Many childrens route to school is along Hollingdean Road.

- Proposal would be noisy and detrimental to learning environment.

- The WTS would mean no prospect of reducing traffic in an already busy area.

34

CONSULTATIONS pages 41 to 45
Internal consultees

Check out the Council's justifications for the BH2006/00900

Environmental Health

Planning Policy

Site selection process

Sustainability

Transport Planning and Policy

This page was last updated by Ted on 06-Jan-2019
(registered users can amend this page)