home
contact us
join us
what's new
local elections 2008
mk wind farm
2007 local elections
calendar/events
mk expansion
east west rail
archive
		2006 local elections
		general election 05
		mk expansion sept 03
		local elections 2003
		gmnation & incineration
		stop the war
		mk green fringe
		incinerator & rtf
				waste centre approved
				bletchley public meeting
				trojan horse plan B
				update Oct 11
				update Sept 26
				update Sept 6
				update July 11
				other incinerators
				June 2002
		take action
new main section
new main section
press releases
mk city-wide issues
being green in MK
consultation responses

log in

MK Council Development Control Committee 28th May 2003: 'ok Shanks, but hand over more planning gain money'

Although the committee approved Shanks' application at its last meeting, this was subject to a satisfactory planning agreement ('s106 agreement') being drawn up by Shanks' and the Council's lawyers setting conditions.

The planning agreement, described as 'pathetic', 'weak', and 'seriously flawed' by residents, protest groups, and councillors, was supposed to lessen the negative impact of the new mega waste centre, including giving a local residents' committee power over whether the extra Bio MRF's could be built - so that they could veto expansion of the site if Shanks broke pollution and noise regulations, as it has done in the past.

Thirteen representatives of protest groups and local residents gave the committee their view on the draft S106 agreement. Most were of the view that the S106 agreement was still far too weak, failing to impose realistic limits on Shanks (such as hours of working, volume of traffic and waste, noise). The agreement failed to give the community board power to prevent future expansion of the site, argued several speakers.

The proposed limit of 750 waste lorries per day was a joke, said MK Green Party's representative, since that number of lorries could transport the entire domestic waste output of the South East region (4,000,000 tonnes) to the site every year. The number of lorries necessary to transport MK's domestic waste the the site was actually just 19 per day.

Other objectors made the point that although road borne waste would be restricted to a radius of 30 miles, waste could come to the site by rail from absolutely anywhere.

A minority of speakers supported the s106 agreement as it stood, while admitting that it had defects, because of the threat that if the council didn't approve it, the decision might be taken out of MK Council's hands and approved by John Prescott without the concessions currently offered. At worst, the regional government body SEERA might later impose a waste scheme involving an incinerator.

Several councillors who do not sit on the Development Control committee also spoke forcefully against accepting the s106 agreement, notably Chris Williams and Tony Mabbott.

When it came to the vote, two motions were put by members of the committee to defer the agreement to a later meeting. One motion argued the agreement should limit hours of working (currently the plant would be allowed to start operating at 4AM). This motion was defeated. A second motion, to defer while a higher financial sum for 'planning gain' was negotiated, was passed.

Between now and the next meeting, objectors hope to push for a s106 agreement which limits the site to a reasonable scale, reasonable hours, with a community board which has real teeth if the operators break the rules in future. Most feel that just extracting a bigger chunk of planning gain money from Shanks misses the point. Loss of quality of life from a huge waste processing plant can't be balanced by Shanks paying for a new community centre or whatever.

Many objectors would prefer it if the current application was simply refused, so that Shanks could either forget it or come back with a plan which was of a suitable scale for the site - closely bordered as it is by housing estates and schools. Not a suitable place to dump, potentially, all the domestic waste collected between here and Dover.

Think this stinks? Tell MK's Planning department (ian.prosser@milton-keynes.gov.uk, fax 01908 252211 - be sure to give your full name and address) AND ask your local councillor to try to make the Development Control Committee see sense.