Update on Planning, Transport & Other Issues at Ashdown Brickworks

1. The Need for Landfill All landfill sites in East Sussex are now full with the exception of Pebsham, which has been granted a four year extension to infill its Northern Quadrant. While there has been a significant decline in waste arisings through recycling, over 60% of East Sussex waste is still disposed to land.
2. ESCC Waste & Mineral Development Framework Next month (October), East Sussex County Council (ESCC) will publish its 'Preferred Strategy' for Waste Disposal in the county. This is the most crucial stage in its longrunning Waste and Mineral Development Framework (WMDF) process which will decide how waste is handled during the period until 2026.This process will probably complete in 2011 and, if passed by Council, will replace the current Waste Local Plan (WLP) that identifies Ashdown as the only site for landfill in East Sussex (although this plan is no longer 'saved').
   Despite the WMDF recognizing that the landfilling of waste is the least acceptable method of its disposal, and despite the framework process supposedly involving a fresh selection of transfer and disposal sites, it is 99% certain that Ashdown will be identified as a 'Strategic Location' for the landfilling of waste in the Preferred Strategy. This has been confirmed directly to BALI (orally) by Tony Cook, Head of ESCC's Waste Team and is largely due to its current position in the WLP.
   While there is a further stage in the WMDF of 'Site Selection' it is inconceivable that, if Ashdown is identified as a Strategic Location for landfill in the Preferred Strategy, it will not be selected for landfill in the final plan.
   This is an extremely dangerous situation for BALI and Bexhill. As a result BALI has re-engaged its planning lawyers to make submissions on its behalf in the consultation that will follow the publication of the Preferred Strategy. We will argue that 'circumstances have changed' since the Waste Local Plan that make Ashdown no longer suitable for landfill, also that it is not deliverable in the time-frame required. For these and other (environmental etc.) reasons, an appointment of Ashdown as a landfill site would be 'unsound'. (For further information on BALI's case please see the further document 'Update on BALI's Activities to Fight the Proposed Landfill.)
3. The Newhaven Incinerator is currently being constructed with a large capacity sufficient to handle most of the county's residual waste. It would be a great relief to BALI and the people of Bexhill if, as local Councillor Brian Gadd argues, this incinerator could handle our entire waste disposal. However, BALI has studied this issue closely and concluded this is unlikely to be possible in the medium term. Moreover, such a view ignores the problems of waste that cannot be incinerated, the unrecovered metals and the bottom ash produced by incineration which may amount to 25-30% of the waste burnt. The facts on this issue will likely become clear in October when ESCC publishes its Preferred Strategy.
4. London Waste. There is also the question of 1.8 million tonnes of London Waste required to be accepted and disposed of to land by ESCC during the period until 2026 under the South East Plan, finally passed by government earlier this year. However, there are High Court challenges to the plan and the Conservative Party, if elected at the next General Election, may abolish it. Also the Mayor of London has announced in his latest environmental proposals ('Leading to a Greener London') that he wishes to end the practice of exporting waste to the South East. He notes, however, that this 'cannot be done overnight' and will inevitably involve a transition period.
   BALI's view is that it is still probable that East Sussex will be required to receive substantial quantities of London waste. Surprisingly, however, Stephen Hardy of Ibstock Brick Ltd., the owners of the Ashdown site has told BALI that the company will not be prepared to receive London Waste at Ashdown!
5. The role of Ibstock. BALI continues to hold regular meetings with Ibstock and there is no change in their intention to eventually landfill the site on which basis, earlier this year, they unsuccessfully fought in the High Court Rother District Council’s decision to grant itself outline planning permission to extend Bexhill Cemetery into an adjoining field. They also have refused BALI's request to restrict waste landfilled at the site to inert waste as opposed to organic, putrescible waste.
   Ibstock has been hard-hit by the decline in construction during the recession and have closed 5 plants in the past year. Ashdown has often been working on short-time. This is likely to bring forward their plans to landfill the site and they have admitted that discussions on this issue are now taking place at senior level.
   The decline in brick-making works two ways however: the 'holes' are not getting bigger  and to 'open them up' may be costly beyond Ibstock's means at the present time. (However any Waste Contractor to whom Ibstock grants 'landfill rights' at Ashdown might well contribute).
6. The Ashdown Site It is essential to understand that there are two ‘holes’ at the Ashdown site and the plan is to empty one and start landfilling it while continuing to extract clay from the other. (There are probably 30 years of clay extraction left at the site.) To do this Ibstock need to stockpile clay on fairly adjacent land and BALI believes they may be in the process of acquiring land for this purpose, perhaps in the '4 fields' to the east of the quarry owned by Mayo Land Ltd.
7. Transport Links The enormous problem remains of transport access to the site, which currently is insufficient to enable substantial landfill usage. If the Link Road goes ahead, this will only partly resolve the problem. Two further roads are required:
   
   1. A spur road off the Link Road to the A269. This road, entitled the Country Avenue appears in the RDC Local Plan and in ESCC Local Transport Plan 2006-2011 (as a longer-term scheme) but it does not go as far as the A269.
   2. A purpose- built road from the A269 to the Ashdown Site or the continuation of the Country Avenue across the A269 to the site. (This latter suggestion appears in the recent RDC Local Development Framework – Core Strategy.)
   That eventually such roads could be achieved is not doubted, but whether they can be achieved in the time-frame required for Ashdown to be a viable landfill site in the medium term is open to question. However planners tend often to ignore practical realities in favour of paper solutions to the problems they have to deal with.
   

Nick Hollington

Chairman, BALI

September 2009

The Landfill Threat Becomes Real

East Sussex County Council (ESCC) and Brighton and Hove City Council have finally confirmed their plan to use Ashdown Brickworks in Turkey Road, Bexhill for a massive landfill of residual waste starting as early as 2012.

Ashdown the 'Preferred Option'

In their recently published Preferred Strategy for the handling of waste in the County until 2026, ESCC have designated the Ashdown Site as their "Preferred Option" for the landfilling of waste and hope to start a Planning Application next year to complete by the end of 2011. The Strategy was approved by ESCC Cabinet last Wednesday.

The Next Public Consultation

The Strategy does list some possible alternative sites however, and there will be a period of Public Consultation from 21st October to 2nd December this year before Ashdown is definitively selected. Rother District Council, BALI (Bexhill Against Landfill and Incineration) and other local organizations will be making submissions in this consultation and the public will also be invited to give their views.

Despite greater recycling, 60% of the area's approximate 2 million tonnes of waste is still disposed to landfill. Although the Incinerator being built at Newhaven (estimated to start 2012) will be able to burn most of our domestic waste and recover energy from it, landfill will still be needed for other types of waste (e.g. construction and demolition waste) and the bottom ash left after incineration, which can be as much as 25% of the waste burnt. About 4.5 million tonnes of landfill will be needed up to 2026. Most of that is planned for Ashdown as all other landfill sites are closed or (Pebsham) in the process of closure.

BALI is meeting with our local MP, Councillors, environmental groups and other stakeholders to try to co-ordinate a campaign to oppose what they see as a pernicious proposal that would have a devastating effect on the whole town of Bexhill, setting back the Council's plan for its regeneration and likely to lower house prices throughout the town.

Effects on the Community

The community of West Bexhill would be particularly affected if the plan goes through, with an estimated four thousand residents living within a mile of the site. Potential effects of the landfill would include visual impact, odours, pests, noise, dust and litter as well as concerns about public health. Significant daily HGV waste-truck movements would affect a wider area, depending on the routes chosen, but potentially having similar effects and causing traffic congestion.

Several local amenities and their users would be egregiously affected, most importantly the flagship new Bexhill High School being constructed for 1800 young people less than half-a-mile away. Users of the Bexhill Cemetery only 250 metres away (less if the cemetery is extended as planned) would overlook the dump, as would the golfers of Highwoods Golf Club. Arguably worst affected of all would be the much-frequented Highwoods nature reserve, a Site of Special Scientific Interest, whose wildlife would be decimated: birds simply would not nest.

BALI's latest action

In April this year, in anticipation of this decision, BALI re-engaged its prominent legal planning consultant to make a strong case that the choice of Ashdown for landfill is entirely unsound. This case is now ready to submit. Such legal work is, of course, costly and has only proved possible through the generous donations of its supporters and the hard work of its fundraising team.

BALI's case

BALI's case is twofold. Firstly it argues that the effects of a landfill in this location are simply too great. According to Government planning policy, the County Council must clearly demonstrate, in allocating any land for such purposes, that "there is no unacceptable impact on the environment and on communities". BALI will seek to prove that, given the proximity of so many homes and local amenities and so much ancient woodland with unique flora and fauna, the impact will be totally unacceptable.

It will also argue that the choice of Ashdown as the County's landfill site is, in planning terms, "unsafe", in that it cannot be "delivered" (made ready) in the time-frame required by the County Council. The Council needs landfill in the short term to meet an immediate and increasing shortfall in capacity. It is unlikely, however, that Ashdown could be able to receive substantial quantities of waste for some years.

When Ashdown was originally considered as a landfill site it was well-established that there would first need to be created a whole new transport infrastructure as the present access roads (Pear Tree Lane and Turkey Road) are clearly unsuitable. This would consist of the Link Road, a so-called "Country Avenue" spurring off it to the A269, and a purpose-built access road from the A269 to the site. The Link Road, however, if constructed at all, will not be ready until 2012 at the latest and the other roads are at present not even on the drawing board.

It is also not clear that the Ashdown quarries, owned by Ibstock Brick Ltd., have the potential capacity in the short term to receive substantial waste. There are two quarries where they plan to deposit waste in one while continuing to extract clay from the other. However the hole they plan to use for waste is by no means empty and they would need to stockpile clay on nearby land.

Rother District Council

BALI is hoping that Rother District Council will also make a strong case against the proposed landfill, using their substantial planning and legal resources and expertise. While they do not make the final decision, their views as a key stakeholder could be very influential, if not decisive.

 

Greg Barker MP

BALI has already held an urgent meeting with local MP Gregory Barker, who has always been firmly opposed to a landfill at Ashdown and, indeed, was instrumental in forming BALI some years ago. He has assured BALI of his firm support. A campaign will shortly be launched asking local residents and Councillors of all parties to unite against the move, culminating in a Public Meeting which Mr. Barker has agreed to Chair [To be held on Friday 7th November 2009 at 7.00 pm, venue Bexhill High School, Gunters Lane, Bexhill - please come along].

 

Defeat This Monstrous Plan

BALI genuinely believes that the proposal can still be defeated.  "The news is extremely serious and a wake-up call to the people of Bexhill, some of whom have doubted that the threat of a landfill was real", says Nick Hollington, Chairman of BALI. "It's staring us in the face now, but if we can all get together to fight this monstrous plan we can defeat it. But we must act NOW!"

It is hoped that, if the landfill proposal is defeated, work can begin on a plan for eventually restoring the quarries for community use in cooperation with Ibstock. BALI wants them to form part of a "nature reserve" incorporating the Highwoods and surrounding farmland. In this respect, earlier this year BALI made a formal proposal to Rother District Council’s Local Development Framework of a "West Bexhill Countryside Park" similar to that now being created in the Pebsham area. This proposal has now been formally registered.

But first the landfill proposal must be defeated and BALI is calling upon all local residents to write to their local Councillors expressing their views and asking them what they are doing to oppose the plan. 

BALI Chairman Newsletter - September 2009

1. East Sussex County Council (ESCC) has been working since 2006 on its Waste and Minerals Development Framework (WMDF) which will decide how waste is handled in the County until 2026, replacing the Waste Local Plan. BALI has made submissions in the consultations at each stage of the process, this work having been carried out by the Chairman in order to conserve BALI's funds;
2. BALI keeps in close touch with the Waste team at ESCC and in March this year learnt that Ashdown was likely be identified as a 'Strategic Location' for landfill in the Council's Preferred Strategy for Waste, as part of the WMDF. Such a move by ESCC was considered beyond the scope of BALI members to respond to and it decided to re-engage its planning lawyers, DMH Stallard, to:
   
   1. Review our case, looking at all the past documents, correspondence and other data concerning Ashdown, particularly the huge number of documents involved in preparing the Waste Local Plan and the case against an Ashdown landfill by our previous consultant at the Public Inquiry,
   2. Prepare a Strategy for the Objections to Landfill at Ashdown Brickworks. (See Appendix 1).This report was given to BALI in June and our Consultant (Geoff Smith) came to Bexhill to discuss it with us and advise us as to the next steps to take,
3. The main threads of BALI's argument as to why the identification of Ashdown as a landfill site 'this time round' is unsound are that:
   
   1. 'Circumstances have changed' since the Waste Local Plan was adopted in February 2006, notably in national and EU policy regarding landfill, also locally in the increased adverse effect on local amenities, particularly the development of the new Bexhill High School less than half a mile away.
   2. 'An Ashdown landfill could not be delivered in the time-frame required'. Landfill in East Sussex is required in the short and medium term since all landfill sites have already or are shortly closing.(In the longer term less and less landfill will be required.) Ashdown is unlikely to be deliverable for landfill even in the medium term for many reasons. In particular, suitable transport access is unlikely to be available, depending as it does on 3 roads, none of which are yet built and 2 of which are not yet even at the planning stage,
   3. Because Ashdown will not be deliverable in the time-frame required, our Consultant will insist that other sites particularly those suggested for landfill at early stages of the Waste Local Plan, be brought (back) into consideration. We will insist that ESCC hold an objective, transparent, site-selection process,
4. Of course, all other arguments developed by BALI over the years: environmental, effect on local residents, on local amenities - and particularly on the treasured Highwoods - will continue to play a part in our case.
5. Geoff Smith recommended in his report that we instruct him to proceed to further steps as follows and we have instructed him accordingly:
   
   1. To prepare an 'evidence base' largely focusing on the change of circumstances since the Waste Local Plan Inquiry,
   2. To make submissions on the Preferred Strategy of the WMDF when published for consultation in October,
   3. This latter task represents our best chance of getting out of the new Waste Framework, and if successful, we can all relax. If we do not succeed in this, Ashdown will almost certainly be included in the WMDF and there will likely be a Planning Application to use Ashdown for landfill in the not-so-distant (2012?) future.
6. The cost of this legal work has been, of course, substantial. However, we have every confidence in our Consultant, Geoff Smith, who was the man who succeeded in removing the proposed Mountfield Incinerator from the Waste Local Plan. Thanks to our hard-working fundraising team and the generosity of our supporters, we have built up a substantial war-chest of funds. However the chest is not bottomless and we may need to raise further funds if we do not succeed in our present attempt to remove Ashdown Brickworks from the WMDF.
7. We are not actively fundraising or publicising our cause at the present time. We are convinced that when the WMDF Preferred Strategy is published in October the threat of a new landfill in Bexhill will become clear. At this point we will raise a high-profile publicity campaign and resume our fundraising on the back of it.
8. BALI continues to meet with Ibstock on a regular basis, the latest meeting taking place on 30th June 2009. The meetings are amicable and informative and attended by senior Ibstock staff, including the Company Secretary Stephen Hardy. Various BALI members attend. We also arrange visits to the site for our members accompanied by the friendly site Manager Steve Chapman. Ibstock also have made and are making submissions to the WMDF and we have asked them to let us have sight of them.
9. Earlier this year, BALI made various representations in respect of the Ashdown area to Rother District Council's Local Development Framework - Core Strategy in the 'Consultation on Strategic Directions'.
10. 1. We particularly objected to the reference to an extension of the 'Country
       Avenue' from the Link Road across the A269 to 'provide the infrastructure essential to the planned landfill use of the Ibstock site'. This statement, we argued, prejudices the results of the County's WMDF nor is such an extension included in any ESCC Transport plan.
    2. We furthermore proposed the creation of a West Bexhill Countryside Park incorporating the Highwoods, the Ashdown Quarries and the surrounding farmland, analogous and complementary to the Pebsham Countryside Park being created in East Bexhill.
    All BALI's objections and proposals have been registered by RDC and appear on their LDF website.
11. We have developed a website at www.nolandfillatbexhill.org
12. BALI continues to receive heartening support from the local public and from various local groups e.g. the Highwoods Preservation Society and the Rother Environmental Group. Also from local amenities that would be seriously affected by a landfill, for example Highwoods Golf Club, which hosts our meetings and provides copying facilities, etc.
13. BALI enjoys and much appreciates the unwavering support of our MP Greg Barker, whom we consult regularly. We understand he is planning, at a suitable moment, to use his regular local newspaper column to support our campaign.
14. BALI continues to seek further political support, which our Consultant advises should accompany any legal action if we are to achieve success. We particularly need support from our County and District Councillors which is lacking at the present time. (We have sadly lost firm supporters such as Graham Gubby, Ron Dyason and Stuart Earl). At the present time most Councillors, with significant exceptions (e.g. Cllr Martyn Forster), seem to doubt there is any longer a real threat of a new landfill in Bexhill. We believe that the publication of the Council's Preferred Strategy for Waste in October will show all too clearly the current threat and BALI will then make a fresh effort to enlist more Councillor support for our cause. It goes without saying that BALI is an apolitical organization with members and supporters from all political parties and we welcome support from whatever quarter.
15. BALI plans to shortly hold meetings with Mathew Lock, Lead Member, Transport and Environment, East Sussex County Council and Rupert Chubb, the Director of T&E. These have both made the statement that 'burying waste in the ground is no longer an option' and we seek to understand what this means and why it would not apply to Ashdown Brickworks. They will also have the latest information on the capacity of the Newhaven Incinerator and the proposed new roads.
16. BALI also seeks help and support to make and suggest realistic plans to alternatively restore the Ashdown Quarry site once excavated. We have no expertise in this matter and urgently seek such. As stated, we have suggested to RDC that it form part of a West Bexhill Countryside Park incorporating the Highwoods and surrounding farmland, but we have no idea how to develop this proposal further. It is naive to suggest to Ibstock, owned by a huge American conglomerate, that their quarries simply become a 'nature reserve'. They view them quite properly as a valuable company asset and seek to protect their commercial position. For whatever is suggested a commercial case must be made.
    There is also a difficult question to face. We talk of 'landfill' as 'bad', but the Ashdown holes will have to at least part filled with something in order to restore them. As regards filling them with water we are told the site is too small for a reservoir, nor could they become a leisure lake for boating etc. unless at least half-filled with land.
17. BALI continues to follow developments in national policy on waste, waste planning in other counties and planning applications for landfill sites elsewhere, sometimes liaising with their protest groups. There has been a particularly high number of applications in West Sussex and a high-profile political campaign by their MPs and Councillors against such applications. There is a particular relevant planning application to BALI, currently out for consultation, at Laybrook, near Thakeham. This is an Ibstock Quarry, like Ashdown, and we are following developments there closely.

Nick Hollington
BALI Chairman
September 2009

BALI Campaign Update September 2009

It has become crystal clear from evidence we cannot divulge that East Sussex County Council (ESCC) are currently and actively considering Ibstock's Ashdown quarries as a landfill site despite the dire consequences this will entail for our local residents and our beloved Highwoods.

 

All will be revealed in October, when ESCC will publish its 'Preferred Strategy' for waste as part of its "Waste and Minerals Development Framework" (WMDF). The Ashdown quarries will almost certainly be selected as a "Strategic Location" for the landfilling of East Sussex waste and the waste due to come from London under the South East Plan.

 

During the recent elections, Cllr. Gadd called the rumours of a landfill at Ashdown 'rubbish' and claimed that the incinerator being built at Newhaven will be able to handle all our (and London's) waste. BALI does not believe this for many reasons. Just one example is that certain types of waste (e.g. metals) cannot be incinerated and the bottom ash (or 'fly ash') remaining after incineration can amount to 25-30% of the waste burnt. All this has to be landfilled unless other means of disposal are found.

 

We are not standing idly by and will fight any proposals to landfill waste at Ashdown all the way. In anticipation of 'bad news' in October, we have reengaged our lawyers (DHM Stallard) to digest all the previous (voluminous) material regarding Ashdown and to recommend a plan of action. They have now done this and will proceed to make a case in response to the forthcoming proposals arguing that the site should be excluded from the WMDF for a whole host of reasons - unfortunately too detailed to go into here.

 

All this legal action is necessary, but expensive, and we are grateful for the generous donations made by BALI supporters hitherto. Following the last Highwoods news letter we had an anonymous gift of £200 for which we would like to thank the donor. If you would be willing to donate, would like more information about BALI or would like to help in any way, please phone me on 01424 843046.

 

Nick Hollington
Chairman B.A.L.I (Bexhill Against Landfill and Incineration)

 

PS:  One thing we'd like to develop is a positive plan for the Ashdown quarry for the future which excludes the landfilling of organic waste. We have suggested to Rother District Council as part of their Local Development Framework that they consider a "West Bexhill Country Park" including the quarries, the Highwoods and the lovely adjoining countryside. However we don't have the expertise to practically develop this project. Can you help - or do you know anyone who can?