Hearing into plans for controversial waste incinerator plant near Sowerby Bridge reconvenes

Planning Inspector John Woolcock re-convened a hearing in Halifax to hear more submissions following Calder Valley Skip Hire’s appeal against Calderdale Council’s failure to determine its application.

A complicated history has seen the council refuse planning permission for the small waste incineration plant at Belmont Works on the edge of Sowerby Bridge.

That decision was overturned on appeal to the Planning Inspectorate, but then objectors won the right to a judicial review of a subsequent decision by the council’s Cabinet to grant an environmental permit, after which the permit was quashed.

Following this, the status of the permit application was deemed to be “undetermined”, so the company made an appeal again, which reconvened on Wednesday (May 31) at the Caygill Rooms at Halifax’s Piece Hall.

Representatives of the appellants, the council, objectors and residents clashed, in often heated exchanges, over issues including operating conditions, permissible periods of operation, temperature levels and measurements, emission levels, sampling, inspections, residues and methods of monitoring and reporting, all discussed as part of a debate on conditions to regulate the permit if the Inspector decides it should be allowed.

Accident management, storage of waste, the nature of the waste which might be burned and treatments, reviews of the permit, issues of heat and power it might provide and to what end, and design of units were also discussed.

Coun Steven Leigh (Con, Ryburn) told the hearing objectors were concerned because the appellant and the council were effectively on the same side, not opposing the permit.

They were often in agreement over aspects of condition terminology but the appellant’s team, led by barrister Mr Satnam Choongh, said this was because they were looking at it with the council as regulator and the applicant as operator.

Residents, who also raised issues about surrounding woodland’s ability to disperse emissions and flood risk, which the appellant and council said had been dealt with at the planning application stage, said confidence was an issue.

One objector, David Wager, said it was a question of confidence, either in what the council could do in event of things going wrong or in the operator providing what was specified to regulate the incinerator.

Coun Felicity Issott (Con, Ryburn) questioned whether the council had the resources to fully monitor the operation if a permit was granted.

Cabinet member for Public Services and Communities, Coun Jenny Lynn (Lab, Park), said she understood people’s concerns and the council knew what its responsibilities were.

Barrister John Barrett, leading the council’s team, said in the closing statements that robust conditions could control the incinerator’s activities, aims including protecting the environment and human health.

But George Pitt, for the objectors, was not convinced sufficient details about the plant which was to be installed had been given.

Mr Choongh said the permit process was concerned not with the design but a description of measures it needed to meet, and what governing articles said should be achieved, would be achieved.

Mr Woolcock will now consider all representations made, including ones he allowed to be made after the first hearings last November and written submissions.

He is expected to close the inquiry next Wednesday, June 7, after which he will consider his decision.

He will not accept any new representations following the Halifax hearing session.

Documents are published on the council’s website, with final ones on agreed conditions to be completed by next Wednesday and then published too.

The Ryburn Valley incinerator plan has been opposed by residents, campaign groups, Halifax MP Holly Lynch, Calder Valley MP Craig Whittaker and councillors cross-party, with most recently a more than 1,000 signature petition over the permit.