Charlton Eco Park: A chronology of a community let down by its leaders

Set out below is a the history of the Eco Park proposal over the last seven years. From the first hint of an incinerator in the Surrey Waste Plan the local Liberal Democrats have opposed this development and tried to get Spelthorne Council to do something about it. It is a sad story of Conservative controlled councils who stuck their heads in the sand or alternatively actually wanted the development to go ahead. Either way the community has been completely let down by the people who are meant to represent their best interests.

Charlton has always been the wrong place for an incinerator.

2007

Surrey Waste Plan Enquiry: Spelthorne is the only council in Surrey to say YES to having an incinerator.

Dec 2009

The Eco Plan Project is sprung on residents and councillors without warning.

March 2010

Spelthorne's Borough Bulletin carries an advertisement supporting the Eco Park.

2010

Through 2010 Lib Dem councillors asked a series of question of Spelthorne Tories who refuse to say NO to the Eco Park.

Oct 2010

At what turned out to be a stormy public meeting, Surrey County Council tried to defend the Eco Park. As a result of this the developer - SITA - refuses to take part in any further meetings with more than 35 people.

Nov 2010

Spelthorne Council's cabinet votes YES to 60k tonne incinerator and 40k tonne anaerobic Digestor

(ref Cabinet agenda item 15 'A plan for waste management'. appendix A 'Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy' p26 and p30)

Page 26

"A 40,000 tonne per year AD facility is proposed for Surrey at Charlton Lane, on, and composting facilities to treat 80,000 tonnes of green waste at other places still to be determined. The co-location of facilities is preferred because of operational and environmental benefits. This will also assist in the reduction of traffic movements."

Page 30

"The site that has been identified to date by the WDA is Charlton Lane, Shepperton. This is a major existing CRC, MRF and TS and plays a strategic role in managing waste from the northern parts of the county. It is available for redevelopment and can accommodate an AD, residual waste treatment facility whilst maintaining existing MRF and CRC capacity."

Dec 22nd 2010

A Special meeting of Spelthorne Council's Planning Committee has to advise Surrey on what they think of the proposed Eco Park.

(ref Special Planning meeting 22nd Dec).

In a total U-Turn they OBJECT. Was it really such a U-Turn? This is ALL they objected to...

"There is a lack of clarity in the purpose of the application to retain the existing facilities in their entirety beyond the life of the current temporary planning permission in 2016. This means that the required case for very special circumstances to allow inappropriate development on the Green Belt has not been sufficiently demonstrated on a permanent basis. It is considered that there is some justification for allowing a further extension of the temporary permission and a period of 9 years, up to 2025 is deemed reasonable."

This is NOT the 'strong objection' Spelthorne claim to have made. Also it is very weak in planning terms. Surrey easily overcame this sole reason by granting themselves an extension of time for using the site.

ALSO

Spelthorne put in some concerns IF the application was granted. One of the objections was to protect Footpath 70, which runs through the site. Spelthorne Council was subsequently to undermine their own objection.

June 2011

At a meeting lasting more than three hours the Incinerator is agreed by a Tory dominated majority of the Surrey planning committee. Included is an extension of the time they can use the land - thus knocking out Spelthorne's only objection.

What is important about this is that it sets so much in stone. The subsequent planning meeting was all about details and changes. Like whether or not the core issues were settled here. NO complaint was raised by Spelthorne about Green Belt, congestion, air quality, residential amenity, due process or over-crowding - in fact nothing.

Early 2012

Stung by endless complaints Spelthorne get the advice of a QC, who finds nothing untoward in the information supplied by Spelthorne Council. Spelthorne tells everyone there are no legal grounds to opposing the Eco Park. In fact of course this depends whether or not Spelthorne asked the QC to look in the right places!

March 2012

There was a long gap between granting the original planning permission and the government deciding not to stop the application so this second meeting was to look at any changes to planning in the intervening period - they decided there wasn't.

GAME OVER - EXCEPT IT WASN'T

Jan 2014

The company developing the technology went bust because the technology was rubbish. Surrey spent months travelling halfway around the world (on your money) looking for a replacement which they eventually found in Italy. In the meantime Footpath 70 had to be moved in order to allow the site to expand. This is the same footpath Spelthorne wanted to protect originally. They promised residents they would oppose the move. They didn't and they secretly told Surrey that they had 'No Objection' to the move.

March 2014

Many felt the "Italian Job" should have been a new planning application given that it was a different technology and needed 43 'minor' amendments, to get it through.