Borough’s planning committee objects to Parbold Hill landfill plan
WEST Lancs Council’s planning committee have objected to the Parbold Hill landfill proposals.
The controversial application had been called in for consideration at the committee by Parbold Conservative councillor Mrs May Blake.
The borough had been asked for their observations on the application which had been made by Lancashire County Council.
The proposals involve the land restoration and regrading of the quarry by the importation of inert material, associated highway works and construction of a public car park.
A total of 30 members of the public attended the meeting on Thursday, September 5.
The council’s planning officer had recommended that councillors object.
At the meeting, Aughton & Downholland Conservative councillor David O’Toole proposed accepting the objection and the chair of the committee chair, Knowsley Labour councillor Gareth Dowling seconded.
All the councillors, except one, voted to accept the decision to object.
Lancashire County Council is expected to make a decision on the proposals in about two or three months time.
Del Ellis of campaign group Stop Parbold Hill Landfill, said: “To date around 1,000 residents along with parish councils in Parbold, Dalton, Newburgh, Appley Bridge with Wrightington, Hilldale and Lathom South have objected. Now the borough council has objected to the plan. The councils believe that the development is inappropriate in the Green Belt and that it will be detrimental to residential amenity or environment.
“In addition, Lancashire County Council highways department has objected on road safety grounds and the Environment Agency has objected to the application in its current form saying they do not have enough information to determine if the development can meet their requirements to prevent, minimise and/or control pollution.
“The West Lancs branch of Campaign for the Protection of Rural England has also objected.”
The borough planning officer’s report to councillors stated: “The proposed development is inappropriate development within the Green Belt which causes harm to openness and would cause urban sprawl by encroaching into the open countryside contrary to the purposes of the Green Belt.
“The council consider this Green Belt harm to be substantial and that the justification for works to be less than compelling as it appears to be carried out to reduce costs to the land owner rather upgrade the landform and landscape quality.
“In particular Phase 1 works contain little of public benefit. It is not considered that the substantial Green Belt harm is outweighed by any very special circumstances put forward by the applicant. WLBC consider that the development proposed would be detrimental to visual amenity and the character of the landscape.”
A statement by Peter Dickinson Architects, acting as agents for the applicant, Mayfield Investment Ltd, read: “The applicant and land owner is working closely with all relevant authorities to ensure they are proposing works which are appropriate and necessary, and with the least level of impact.”