'Artlepool. The Nations Favouritre tip.

[mk1]

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/landfill-battle-lost-and-hartlepool-taxpayers-pick-up-six-figure-legal-bill-1-6966237


A CASH-strapped council that tried to fight the expansion of a controversial landfill site faces a six-figure legal bill after losing a long-running planning war.


The Seaton Meadows site, at Brenda Road, was finally given permission to expand by the Planning Inspectorate after a wrangle which goes back to 2010.

The local authority's planning committee had rejected the plan after complaints from residents.

But after winning an appeal, the site's operators ALAB will now see the local authority pick up the legal bill.

The costs have been kept under wraps by both ALAB and the council, though the Mail understands the final figure is in excess of £100,000
It follows the £470,000 legal bill the local authority paid to parent company Able UK after a seperate planning row over the controversial 'ghost ships' back in 2010.

Management at ALAB were initially allowed to pile landfill up to a height of 18m.

But after a fire at the site in 2007, more waste was added as a way of extinguising the blaze which was deep-seated within the landfill.

Over time, the height of the waste reached 26m and a retrospective application for an extension to the height was submitted in August 2010
Legal wranglings meant it was another two years before the application reached Hartlepool Council's Planning Committee, and it was eventually refused in July 2012.

An appeal was immediately lodged, and the Planning Inspectorare has now given permission for a vertical expansion which means waste can now be piled up to 26m across the 24 hectare site.

Coun Paul Thompson, independent representative for the Seaton ward, described the decision as "a sad day for Seaton Carew".

Coun Thompson said: "The delays in this case have quite frankly been disgraceful.

"For the appeal to allow expanision is a sad day for Seaton.

"This is a gateway into Seaton Carew. Loose rubbish flies about, it smells and it is an eyesore.

"The decision has been taken is contrary to local opinion as well, it is ludicrous."

Elizabeth Ord from the Planning Inspectorate outlined the reasons behind the decision in a lengthy report which was finally made public earlier this week after the ruling was rubber-stamped last month.

The report said: "The application is in part retrospective and is intended, amongst other things, to regularise over-tipping.

"Some of the drawings and plans upon which the Council made its decision to refuse planning permission have been revised.

"I am satisfied that no issues of natural justice arise and I have determined this appeal on the basis of the submitted revisions.

"From my site visit observations I agree with the conclusions the landscape quality of the site and its surroundings, and its sensitivity to change are low.

"Against this background, the proposed height, mass and form could be readily absorbed into the landscape.

"Consequently, I conclude that the landscape character would not be materially harmed by the proposal."

A council spokesman said: "We have been made aware of the Planning Inspectorate's decision and this will be discussed at the council's Planning Committee next Wednesday, November 26."


Able UK calls for better relationship with council


THE operator of Seaton Meadows has welcomed the planning inspectorate's ruling - and has now called for a better working relationship with Hartlepool Council.

Andrew Jacques, managing director of Able UK and site operators ALAB Environmental Services, was critical of the council's planning committee for rejecting the appeal in the first instance.

Mr Jaques said: "In August 2012 we had an application for extending the height of the landfill site and revising its restoration plan turned down by members of the planning committee despite receiving a clear recommendation from officers that it should be approved.

"Now, following a hearing in October this year, the Planning Inspector has ruled that the application would not cause any significant harm and would constitute sustainable development.

"The application arose out of a specific safety need to raise the height of the site. It had the approval of the council's officers and support from the other statutory consultees and the council's own ecologist also raised no objections.

"Regrettably the decision by the members of the Planning Committee to refuse the application was an example of history repeating itself as in January 2010 the council was compelled to pay £470,000 towards Able costs following a previously flawed decision. "In this latest instance the inspector has ruled that again the council will have to meet part of our costs.

"Whilst we are pleased with the outcome of our appeal, it is a pity that it had to happen at all but what we now hope is that it will be possible for us to work with the authority and move forward in a way which can avoid any further instances of this kind."


If only ABLE had copied NIRAMAX and donated to the Mayor's 'charidee' all of this could have been avoided.
Perhaps the Wheel should be built on top  of the tip as the the view would extend to Kent!

[Lord Elpus]

I understand as part of Labours election campaing in Fens and Rossmere.  Their man Clark will soon inform all and sundry that Niramax will be funding a revamp of Rossmere Park using Landfill tax money.

Positive reciprocity in action.

[mk1]

The pond in Rossmere is the pit left from the clay extracted by the old brickworks that used to be sited  there. It was up to 18ft deep and had to be partially filled to make it safe
Seems  like the people of Seaton will suffer greatly so the Labour group can bribe Rossmere residents with  a few flower beds.
Bung or landfill tax?
Matters not a jot as long as the money can be used to bolster a Labour  candidates standing

[fred c]

Unfortunately there will be more of these costly planning appeals to come, the town finances are at rock bottom & concil tax payers on the bones of their a**s ............ And still The TorLab Mob haven`t produced a new town plan & consistently go against the proffesional advice of Planning Officers.

What a shower of unadulterated s***e, we have runnning the town, it really is time a higher authority was brought in to look at the "Unsavoury" wheeling & dealing that encompasses the decision making process of The TorLab Mob.

Only In Hartlepool & Only Under The Mob

[gmeasor]

As a resident of Seaton Carew this is indescribably bad. 

The idea that they are going to revamp Rossmere park with landfill tax money infuriates me.  Do they know there is a park in Seaton?

What is going to happen when our council is bankrupt?  Because that's where it's heading.
£100,000 just lost.  Our money, gone forever. 

Please remember to ask your canvassing Labour councillors how they are going to find this extra hundred grand!

WHERE IS OUR LOCAL PLAN! Over a year down the line, millions wasted. 

I'm running out of words to illustrate my dismay at the whole state of affairs. 

[pensionater]

gmeasor,if they hadn't fought to stop the landfill they would have been slagged off for this as well .The reason you are running out of words is because you never stop whingeing.Have you talked to your Independent Councillor about this ?.

[The Great Dictator]

If they hadn't challenged the landfill site you would have moaned even more..

[gmeasor]

Always whinging, I've only posted 9 times, lol.

You are both right, dammed if they objected and dammed if they allowed it.
In the absence of a plan, they were always going to be powerless to stop this.  So the main points of my post were the cost to the council tax payer and the fact that landfill money was going to be spent in Rossmere park.

I asked about the height of the landfill at the last council meeting and received a confusing reply.  To which I have since contacted the council on 3 occasions seeking clarification.  Here is a summary of what I put to them.  Bear in mind this was before the news broke the other day, although the decision it would appear may have already been made.

Dear planning control,

Further to a public question which was asked of Hartlepool council regarding enforcement of the height restrictions at Seaton Meadows Landfill.  Which was:

Regarding Seaton Meadows Landfill.  What are the council going to do about enforcing the height restrictions which were a condition of the planning permission granted by the council?  The site only has permission for 18m height (post settlement) and is now expected to be 26m (post settlement). At present, it is 33m in places.

What is going to be done about this?  The good people of Seaton are tired of been bookended by landfill sites, and the flagrant disregard the company are showing for planning regulations is scandalous.

Can you please provide me with some clarification on this matter based on the answer I received on the 30/10/14 at full council.  Which was:-

"They submitted a full planning application in 2010 to establish a vertical extension of the proposed height of 32.5m on completion of the landfill operation pre settlement, falling to approx 26m following settlement.  This was refused on the 8th July 2012 with the decision notice being issued on 24th August 2012.
Resulting from that decision, the council has not sought to take any enforcement against the height of landform on the Seaton meadows landfill.

The 2012 decision was appealed by the applicant.  The planning appeal is currently ongoing with the planning inspectorate.  With the public hearings on appeal, having  taken place on the 8th October of this year.  No decision has yet been made by the planning inspector, and no timescale has been set out by the planning inspector as to whether that appeal decision will be approved.

The council is waiting on the outcome decision of this appeal before taking any further appropriate action.  Depending on the outcome of the appeal appropriate enforcement action could be taken to reduce the height of the landform.

However, this will need to be balanced against potential health and safety issues relating to reducing the height/shape of the landfill landform."

Could you please tell me why it took Hartlepool Council 2 years to reject this planning application?

Also, why no action was taken to enforce height restrictions following the un-successful application to increase the height of the Landfill?

Why has it taken a further 2 years for an appeal to be heard?

Why has no timescale been set for a decision on this appeal?

Why have the company running the landfill been allowed to continue dumping in excess of their agreed permissions for what amounts to in excess of 4 years?

If subsequent enforcement action is ever taken, then why did our councillors say this would need to be balanced against potential health and safety issues relating to the landfill? as surely the cost of returning the height of the landfill to it's agreed limits should be met by the company who continued to dump waste in full knowledge they did not have permission.

Kind Regards


Moving forward, our esteemed council is now left with a hundred grand to find.  And any money gained from landfill tax looks like it's going to be spent outside of Seaton.  You say I'm winging, I assume that you are both okay with this?

[fred c]

Its a difficult one to work out..... who`s considered to be worse, the Whingers or those that Whinge at the Whingers.

I have spoken the Graham at a number of council meetings, he has asked a series of question on some of the serious issues faced by the town, but, like  a lot us Whingers he has had no positive responses to those questions.

Posting here & on the Mail website is one of the very few ways that concerned civic minded residents can vent their spleen about what the TorLab Mob are doing to Hartlepool, its not much i agree, but it is extremely difficult for the man in the street to do anything else.

So, with the constant Trolling by various people on this forum............

Maybe they could spend a nano second of the busy lives to explain to the rest of us, just what they are doing in the pursuit of making the town a better place to live.

[for fawkes sake]

Is it not true that those who are the most vitriolic towards those who currently hold power are the same people dismissing others attempting to do something about it as 'whingers'? 

[beanzontoast]

This council will always try to dump stuff in wards it can't control Seaton and Hart wards are potential targets and will always remain so, unless the residents of Hartlepool vote to remove them, Seaton and Hart Wards have at least elected a new breed of councillor,  and Gmeasor it is right you should talk to your Independent councillor Paul Thompson this happened on his watch

[Lord Elpus]

Paul has done more on this issue than anyone I know, you really can't afford to alienate yourself from people you need to work with.