I forwarded 2 emails to p.durrans@worcestershire.gov.uk on the 23/10/06 and received no acknowledgement or reply thus far. Here are the copies. First email sent 23/10/06 Subject Worcestershire County Council - Planning Application No. 06/01539 I attended a meeting at Littleworth parish hall Friday evening and was surprised and angry to hear about a proposal for a waste site on my doorstep which is being treated as a fait accomplis. Surely, such a proposal with far reaching and possibly devastating affects on the surrounding neighbourhood would require methodical and thorough investigation as to the suitability of such a site taking into account the concerns and wishes of the local people let alone the local parish council, the local rural council, Wychavon, and the local member of parliament, Peter Luff. You have not. We also heard that a county councillor on planning was sent out of a planning meeting upon hearing the news - so much for democracy! If we cannot rely on our elected representatives to defend our interests then we must ask you, and your fellow officers, to do your job to the best of your ability and make the right decision for the right reasons - that is to say, in the open and not behind closed doors with lies and half truths i.e. there has been no consultation with the majority of the people in Norton, there is infact a water course at the site, and a pond. A video was shown at the meeting of a similar site in Cardiff which caused a plague of flies within a mile of the vicinity - we have a popular restaurant, an old peoples home and an infant and junior school within that scope. Is it reasonable and fair to inflict this on those people together with any other form of airborne pollution? The B4084 road is wholly unsuitable at the junction of Woodbury Lane for the foreseen level of traffic - I have complained about the safety of the road previously, to no avail. What improvements are proposed to increase the safety? Woodbury Lane has in recent years been subject to flooding. What safeguards are in place to ensure that this will not re-occur following any development? Perhaps the thinking is that on paper there are adequate transport links to the site. Well if you commute via junction 7 you are aware of the appalling conjestion there is at the usual times of the day now - any additional traffic at that focal point will potentially cause horrendous problems - especially when accidents occur. I understand the adoption of the new A44 and the bypass at Wyre Piddle was constructed purely for the tip facilities at Lower Moor where Severn Waste Services already operate from - why is the construction proposal not being carried out there where the indigenous population accept the co-existence of the re-cycling facility. Or was the investment a white elephant at the expense of the public? I understand that there were plans for 22 units at the same site which was rejected because the site is contaminated. What is the site contaminated with? What has changed at the site for the proposal to be now given the go ahead? Government policy dictates that recycling should be handled locally so where is the sense in transporting waste from Redditch and the Welsh border to a village outside Worcester! Hereford is also mentioned but I thought the County Council jurisdiction did not include Hereford. Surely the expense and environmental impact is wasteful and harmful. Ideally, any new site ought to be situated in the North of the region where there is no facility at present. I understand that a policy for waste has not been ratified for the past 11 years. Frankly, if your department is unable to come up with a cohesive plan in that length of time then you are inept and any of your decisions must be scrutinised closely and treated with suspicion. I would also like to take issue with the proposal that any building would be constructed in a similar style and size as the Blue Arrow complex. What a blot on the landscape that turned out to be. Once again I call into question the judgement of planners able to sanction such an eyesore. I am very supportive of any recycling initiative and the system we have in place with coloured plastic bags and bottle bins works very well with us, the public, carrying out the sorting first hand. We do not want the regressive step offortnightly wheely bins that Worcester City, in their wisdom, have adopted. I understand that Worcestershire County council is approving the application and acting as agent for the waste contractors, Severn Waste Services. If this is the case then you as an employee cannot be impartial and the council have a vested interest in the proposal which is corruption. A public inquiry is the only fair, reasonable and just way to decide the way forward. Yours Chris Morag Second sent 23/10/06 Subject 06/01539 Further to my earlier email I would like to ask questions about the following statements - the application does not need to be supported by a formal Environmental Statement Why not? On whose say so? - a trawl of the commercial property market in 2005/6 culminated in the selection of the Area 7 Business Park at Norton near Worcester as being the preferred site in respect of all the selection criteria Who made the selection? In preference to where? What were the selection criteria? - the MRF's at Hill and Moor and at Rotherwas have neither the capacity nor the technology suite capable of handling the range and volume of materials projected Why not a new build at the existing sites? Since you work in partnership with Mercia Waste Management perhaps you can furnish me with the answers.