Campaigners to fight recycle plan to bitter end
CAMPAIGNERS fighting plans for a recycling plant in the Worcestershire village of Norton have warned councillors they will fight the proposal to the bitter end - after parishioners agreed to back them financially.
About 120 Norton parishioners voted unanimously to pay an extra 50p a week on their council tax to raise money so an action group could afford to mount a legal challenge if the application were to be approved.
As previously reported by the Worcester News, Mercia Waste Management has applied to build a recycling centre in Woodbury Lane which could process 105,000 tonnes of material annually from Worcestershire and Herefordshire.
The idea has met fierce opposition from people living nearby who fear it will create traffic congestion and cause pollution and noise nuisance. They also believe the plans could eventually lead to the creation of a much bigger plant and say the proposal will devalue their homes.
The vote, by a show of hands, was taken at the annual meeting of Norton Parish Council after a presentation by j-7 waste action group.
Parishioners heard the group would need to raise £95,000 if the decision were subject to a judicial review and hoped to secure £30,000 from a one-off precept (charge) added to the council tax which would see a Band D property paying an extra £110 a year.
The group's chairman Ken Munn said: "I know it's a total travesty that we must raise this money to fight our own council who are already paid by us to act on our behalf and for our benefit."
Residents were told the group was investigating ways to raise more money through donations and had written to ask the nearby parishes if they would consider a similar precept.
A decision on whether to impose the precept will be taken at a parish council meeting later this month.
Residents also heard they may have more support after Wychavon District Councillor Paul Middleborough, who lives in the parish, said Wychavon could consider a legal bid if the plan was approved.
Speaking after the meeting, Norton resident Alan Yates said: "We are prepared to fight with the action group and do our best to stop it.
"It's such a lovely little village and I wouldn't like to see it spoiled."
The planning application will be considered by Worcestershire County Council on Tuesday, May 15.
8:00am Saturday 14th April 2007
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: carolfarrell, worcestershire on 7:12pm Sat 14 Apr 07
Don't raise your hopes. As you say, the council are supposed to represent you but they certainly do not. Your lovely little village will suffer the same fate as our lovely little Britain.
Ravaged.
Don't raise your hopes. As you say, the council are supposed to represent you but they certainly do not. Your lovely little village will suffer the same fate as our lovely little Britain.
Ravaged.
Posted by: realist on 9:27pm Sat 14 Apr 07
So we are taking waste from far less populated and far more rural Herefordshire!Then there`s the small matter of the lorry miles (on our congested roads) bringing it here.
Very "green" and a perfect example of "joined up thinking"....NOT!!!
So we are taking waste from far less populated and far more rural Herefordshire!Then there`s the small matter of the lorry miles (on our congested roads) bringing it here.
Very "green" and a perfect example of "joined up thinking"....NOT!!!
Posted by: Liz Carnell, Harrogate on 9:47pm Sat 14 Apr 07
Your community is already being adversly affected by plans for this waste processing plant. My family recently looked at a nursing home in your village but decided not to place an elderly relative there because we didn't think it would be very pleasant having lorries thundering down the lane and the associated smells.
Your community is already being adversly affected by plans for this waste processing plant. My family recently looked at a nursing home in your village but decided not to place an elderly relative there because we didn't think it would be very pleasant having lorries thundering down the lane and the associated smells.
Posted by: D, Worcester on 4:51pm Sun 15 Apr 07
NIMBYS
Posted by: OMG, Worcester on 7:44pm Sun 15 Apr 07
Who cares about landfill sites and if they do why dont they put it in the coloured recycling bags and have their future rubbish sent to china.
Who cares about landfill sites and if they do why dont they put it in the coloured recycling bags and have their future rubbish sent to china.
Posted by: NIMBY on 8:20pm Sun 15 Apr 07
It`s D for dunce,I think!
Can`t you see that calling someone a NIMBY is the latest fashion among the odiously smug dimwits who have too much power in today`s Britain?
What is wrong with being sensibly concerned to protect what you love and cherish about your immediate environment?
Let`s guess that if it was a case of the Marsh Arabs or Kalahari Bushmen protecting their turf our creepy,smug,Dunce would be shouting support from the rooftops!
Prat!
It`s D for dunce,I think!
Can`t you see that calling someone a NIMBY is the latest fashion among the odiously smug dimwits who have too much power in today`s Britain?
What is wrong with being sensibly concerned to protect what you love and cherish about your immediate environment?
Let`s guess that if it was a case of the Marsh Arabs or Kalahari Bushmen protecting their turf our creepy,smug,Dunce would be shouting support from the rooftops!
Prat!
Posted by: D, Worcester on 9:08pm Sun 15 Apr 07
As you have just proved, NIMBYS
As you have just proved, NIMBYS
Posted by: Chris Morag on 11:21pm Sun 15 Apr 07
I am heartened to hear that Wychavon may consider a legal bid if the plan is approved. We have had our faith in council staff shattered and were concerned that a small voice of reason was not being heard. Lets hope common sense will prevail.
I am heartened to hear that Wychavon may consider a legal bid if the plan is approved. We have had our faith in council staff shattered and were concerned that a small voice of reason was not being heard. Lets hope common sense will prevail.
Posted by: D on 11:39pm Sun 15 Apr 07
Look,if it`s really troubling you so much,I will volunteer my neighbourhood for the site of the new tip.
I`m so despised by my family and everyone around me that it will serve them all right to have the inconvenience!
Anything to avoid being called a NIMBY by every brainless wally on the Web!
Look,if it`s really troubling you so much,I will volunteer my neighbourhood for the site of the new tip.
I`m so despised by my family and everyone around me that it will serve them all right to have the inconvenience!
Anything to avoid being called a NIMBY by every brainless wally on the Web!
Posted by: Perdiswell resident, Worcester on 10:46am Mon 16 Apr 07
I do think this is NIMBY-ism. I'm sure the residents of Norton are more than happy to use the facilities on Bilford Road, addding to the traffic congestion and noise for people who live close by.
I live on the Blanquettes estate, and trying to exit the estate onto Bilford Road on a Saturday morning or Bank Holiday is a nightmare, as there is more often then not 4 lanes of traffic and queues to get into the tip blocking the road. Then add to this the fact that they start moving the skips around before 8 in the morning, creating the load squeal of grinding metal!
We tried to stop the extension of the Bilford Road waste site, but that made no difference.
I do think this is NIMBY-ism. I'm sure the residents of Norton are more than happy to use the facilities on Bilford Road, addding to the traffic congestion and noise for people who live close by.
I live on the Blanquettes estate, and trying to exit the estate onto Bilford Road on a Saturday morning or Bank Holiday is a nightmare, as there is more often then not 4 lanes of traffic and queues to get into the tip blocking the road. Then add to this the fact that they start moving the skips around before 8 in the morning, creating the load squeal of grinding metal!
We tried to stop the extension of the Bilford Road waste site, but that made no difference.
Posted by: John Wilson on 1:21pm Mon 16 Apr 07
Do you have strong feelings about this scheme? If so air your views on our new online formum. Just click on the formums link at the side of the Worcester News home page.
Do you have strong feelings about this scheme? If so air your views on our new online formum. Just click on the formums link at the side of the Worcester News home page.
Posted by: realist on 10:21pm Mon 16 Apr 07
What`s wrong with the system we are currently using John?
I suppose we could raise new issues rather than just react to items in the WN,though.
What`s wrong with the system we are currently using John?
I suppose we could raise new issues rather than just react to items in the WN,though.
Posted by: John Wilson, Worcester News on 12:49pm Tue 17 Apr 07
Our comments feature allows readers to react to stories as they break and develop. Forums belong to our readers. It is where they can start debates on issues that are of importance to them. Go on, have a go!
Our comments feature allows readers to react to stories as they break and develop. Forums belong to our readers. It is where they can start debates on issues that are of importance to them. Go on, have a go!
Posted by: Andrew Guy, Whittington on 1:40pm Tue 17 Apr 07
Nimbyism serves a valuable purpose in that it forces important land-use and planning decisions onto the public consciousness. Now that this particular application is being discussed openly and widely, the debate needs to move on.
Does the premise of the need for such a plant stand up to scrutiny and if so then what alternative sites might exist? (other than what is a brownfield site well away from any major centres of population with existing industrial development alongside and reasonable infrastructure access).
I must confess I'm troubled by the tendancy of some nimby campaigners to co-opt a mandate (for example the prominent signs declaring whole villages to be of one mind).
The heat needs to be taken out of the arguments and a rational debate encouraged on this and many other land-use decisons like it in and around Worcester.
Nimbyism serves a valuable purpose in that it forces important land-use and planning decisions onto the public consciousness. Now that this particular application is being discussed openly and widely, the debate needs to move on.
Does the premise of the need for such a plant stand up to scrutiny and if so then what alternative sites might exist? (other than what is a brownfield site well away from any major centres of population with existing industrial development alongside and reasonable infrastructure access).
I must confess I'm troubled by the tendancy of some nimby campaigners to co-opt a mandate (for example the prominent signs declaring whole villages to be of one mind).
The heat needs to be taken out of the arguments and a rational debate encouraged on this and many other land-use decisons like it in and around Worcester.
Posted by: realist on 2:29pm Tue 17 Apr 07
The "heat",Andrew,is created because people feel excluded,duped,mislead,etc.
The debate you call for would work best in an atmosphere of trust and openess,and the sad fact is people have rumbled that Government in Britain is too often about stitching us up to suit interests which have no connection with our area or even British interests of any kind.Who or what have the Blair years really been about?I can`t see what we have gained!
The "heat",Andrew,is created because people feel excluded,duped,mislead,etc.
The debate you call for would work best in an atmosphere of trust and openess,and the sad fact is people have rumbled that Government in Britain is too often about stitching us up to suit interests which have no connection with our area or even British interests of any kind.Who or what have the Blair years really been about?I can`t see what we have gained!
Posted by: Chris Morag, Littlweworth on 9:52pm Wed 18 Apr 07
The report contains a glaring error. The band D figure reported is a sample figure for the total judicial review cost and NOT the precept amount asked for a band D property.
The report contains a glaring error. The band D figure reported is a sample figure for the total judicial review cost and NOT the precept amount asked for a band D property.
Posted by: realist on 8:02pm Thu 19 Apr 07
Why not pursue your human right to quiet enjoyment of your property and village?
We have allowed criminals and terrorists to make mincemeat of us,at our expense,for too long,so what about the human rights of those who work,pay taxes and obey the law? When is the system going to consider us for a change?
Why not pursue your human right to quiet enjoyment of your property and village?
We have allowed criminals and terrorists to make mincemeat of us,at our expense,for too long,so what about the human rights of those who work,pay taxes and obey the law? When is the system going to consider us for a change?
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
